DOC use default_role='any'#12355
Conversation
|
Not really sure how one would go after reviewing this, but the docs seem fine as far as I can tell. Just one thing, is it building the pages somewhat not completely? On the generated artifacts, in this page I don't see the plot I see on the master's equivalent. If that's expected, then it looks good to me. |
|
Given that we generally have avoided this, I don't think the docs will change a lot doing this, so I think we should just go ahead. |
|
This is what single backticks looks like, I doubt whether it is what we want. (I guess sphinx is now trying to link everything with single backticks?) |
|
Yes, backticked terms will be monospace, and linked where possible. Why is that not what we want @qinhanmin2014? |
I guess sometimes (most times maybe) contributors use single backticks for specific terms, like double backticks. They actually don't want to link it to any existing materials in the repo (if so, maybe they'll be using things like |
|
I don't see why we shouldn't link... But we could initially just make it
use code formatting instead of the :any: role.
|
I'll vote +0. Waiting for a +2 to merge this one. |
qinhanmin2014
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since this is a doc issue, I'll follow the majority.
This reverts commit 7df61c1.
This reverts commit 7df61c1.
Fixes #11186
I've realised that sphinx's 'any' mostly does what we want:
LogisticRegression,linear_model.LogisticRegression) otherwiseWe may find that we want more control over it than this eventually, but it's a good start.
In all cases it uses
<code>monospace formatting, which could perhaps be improved upon. CSS can be used to do more styling if appropriate, as each link has classes that indicate the type of the target; alternatively, the role definition can be extended.We may consider replacing many of our double backticks with single backticks in documentation that is little touched by open PRs.