Daniele Procida's PyCon AU 2017 talk presents a system that divides documentation into four kinds, usually drawn as four quadrants. He explains why mixing them makes docs poor and how separating them improves writing.
Why Hacker News points people here: HN recommends it as the best concise introduction to a practical framework for structuring documentation, the basis of what became Diataxis.
“I highly recommend Daniele Procida's talk about this”HN comment, 2021
“I highly recommend Daniele Procida's talk about this”
Taxonomy of four kinds of documentation
Full comment
Related to this: understanding the various types of documentation, and using them all appropriately. I highly recommend Daniele Procida's talk about this, [0] and the accompanying web page [1]. He gives a useful taxonomy of the 4 kinds of documentation. Through the power of Unicode: ┌──────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────┐ /\ │ Tutorials │ How-to Guide │ || Practical │ (Learning-oriented) │ (Problem-oriented) │ || ├──────────────────────────┼─────────────────────────┤ │ Discussions │ Reference │ || │ (Understanding-oriented) │ (Information-oriented) │ || Theoretical └──────────────────────────┴─────────────────────────┘ \/ <=== Useful for study Useful for coding ===> [0] this video (that will take you to the start of the talk proper) [1] link edit Didn't spot the link to [1] at the bottom of the article :P
Recommendsivan_ahMar 2022
“a good strategy for writing docs, based on four quadrants”
Strategy for writing docs using four quadrants
Full comment
It's not a book but a website[1] and a talk[2] that explains a good strategy for writing docs, based on four quadrants. [1] link [2] this video
RecommendsO__________OJun 2022
“Anyone looking for a good system of producing documentation should check out”
30-minute presentation of a documentation system
Full comment
____Response to Article____ Engineers are rarely good at writing technical documentation, especially compared to technical writers (that is “secretaries” per author’s lingo) which by definition, should be. Engineers generally cost more than technical writers. Good technical writing saves engineering time both during AND after the documentation is produced. Author spends large amount of time, to poorly express that to be a good technical writer, you must understand who needs what and why, then figure out how to solve that the best way based on the context. ____System for to Producing Tech Docs____ Anyone looking for a good system of producing documentation should check out: link Which has a 30-min presentation: this video Prior HN posts on the system are here: link
RecommendsO__________OJun 2022
“Anyone looking for a good system of producing documentation should check out”
30-minute presentation of a documentation system
Full comment
To be a good technical writer, you must understand who needs what and why, then figure out how to solve that the best way based on the context. Anyone looking for a good system of producing documentation should check out: link Which has a 30-min presentation: this video Prior HN posts on the system are here: link
Cites itO__________OJun 2022
“link to this YouTube presentation on the system”
Presentation on the documentation system
Full comment
They’re officially related. Personally, prefer the link I used since it provides a table of contents and link to this YouTube presentation on the system: this video
CriticalzahlmanDec 2024
“But I don't see anything resembling attribution for the ideas.”
Full comment
I'm a little less than impressed by the presentation here. The idea that Divio is describing here is the Diataxis framework ( link ), which "is the work of" ( link ) Daniele Procida ( link ). Who, incidentally, is also giving the PyCon talk in the video on the page you linked ( this video ). But I don't see anything resembling attribution for the ideas. They aren't just common industry knowledge or "received wisdom". (And the "quote" from David Laing at the top isn't really accomplishing anything, either.)
