# Documentation Community Team Meeting (July 1, 2025)

## Roll call

(Name / `@GitHubUsername` _[/ Discord, if different]_)

- Adam Turner / `@AA-Turner`
- Hugo van Kemenade / `@hugovk`
- irvan.putra
- kattni
- Keith / `@KeithTheEE`
- Lutfi Zuchri
- maciek
- mattwang44
- Ryan Duve / `@ryan-duve`

## Introductions

> If there are any new people, we should do a round of introductions.

Several new attendees were present, a round of introductions were made.

## Discussion

### Topic

- [Ryan] Has there been prior work to automatically detect which Python functions exist
  but aren't in the documentation? I'm imagining something like
  [Moto's implementation coverage document](https://github.com/getmoto/moto/blob/master/IMPLEMENTATION_COVERAGE.md)
  for Boto3, but for documentation coverage. This popped up after
  [seeing a PR](https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/136024) to add documentation for
  a missing function in `importlib.metadata`.

  - Adam: this seems valuable, but not done before. Previously, we had talked about the
    calendar module where we have intentionally non-documented features. It'd be good to
    add the breakdown a dimension that indicates whether a function is intentionally not
    documented or not. Additionally, an existing coverage tool (for example,
    `sphinx.ext.coverage`) could be modified to come up with this list.

  - Could be used as a central store of what is missing, what is intentionally missing,
    perhaps a good 'place to get started' for newer contributors.

  - Kattni: this could be valuable especially for getting new people involved and some
    numbers around the coverage.

- [Adam] I'd like to broach the idea of jargon being used in the standard library and
  how to make it more effective.

  - [Hugo] There are times in the stdlib where it's OK to rely on jargon.

- Irvan: Some jargon should be kept in English because translating it will make it
  harder to be understood, because then the target user will need to re-translate it to
  English when reading. So perhaps, having a feature that when hover cross-references to
  explain/disambiguate jargon?

- Kattni: Recently wrote a guide on using a stdlib tool, but had to look up how to
  properly reference various things. Specifically, referring to a module in the standard
  library and initially got wording wrong.

- Keith: Education & Outreach: Moving from planning to doing. Interested in resources
  for (1) teachers, (2) individuals new to programming, (3) improving python.org.

- Adam: we are reference-docs-biased, we have a high bounce rate.

- Irvan: PHP docs allow comments (user contributed notes), but I am not really sure if
  it is good if we follow that, so maybe we can allow that in other initiatives like the
  new resources for teachers/beginners.

- Ned: current [Report a Bug article](https://docs.python.org/3/bugs.html) could be
  improved to better suggest improvements.

  - Show source should link to raw rst code (`?plain=1`) rather than the render.

- [Ryan]: could we gather all the docs referrer headers and see whether there's info to
  be captured on the pages that are linking to the docs?