@milkman wrote:
and documenting everything I have learned so far that isn’t documented elsewhere.
Which license applies to your docs (http://crystal-clear-research.com/docs/quickrefs/sublime_text/ ), I only see a copyright notice. Asking as there might be things that could be added to https://docs.sublimetext.io/ (I did only see that you seem to have written quite much). If you could put it under a free license, your work could be reused.
Hi, @milkman!
Good question. I haven’t decided yet. I started writing it just for my own use as a quick reference, but there is SO MUCH to Sublime Text and so much that I have yet to learn… And I’ve been kind of tinkering with the idea of turning it into a book (I need the income!). On the other side of that coin, I have most certaintly “spring-boarded” from the documentation that does exist, and most especially from @OdatNurd’s awesome video collection, so in my opinion, it has been a collaborative effort thus far, with the exception of things I had to dig in on myself to discover (e.g. the Viewport page, and a handful of details about the key-binding context “key” values [test names]—and there is a bunch more, but I’ll skip the details).
Please accept the following in a loving, team-member like tone and intention:
One thing is for sure, the current documentation arrangement is a liability in my opinion. Currently (not counting my work) there are 4 places an ST user has to go to to learn something. I personally do not like separating the “Guide” from the “Reference” in the community docs when it means that content is in 2 places (either duplicate or spread out). Example: the “binary_file_patterns” element from a .sublime-project file documented in the Guide, whereas it belongs in this table in the Reference. Things like this make it difficult and inefficient to use.
If I could only show you a copy of the original Lotus 1-2-3 (early, brilliantly-successful spreadsheet software written by Lotus Development Corporation in Assembly Language and produced an .exe that was about 120KB, enough to still have some room on a 128KB floppy disk for a few spreadsheets). One of the real GOLD NUGGETS from that work was its user’s manual. It had a relatively small orientation section in the beginning where most of the main topics were covered briefly to get you started, and then the MAJOR part of the manual was a reference section where the topics were organized in logical order and each one covered THE FULL TOPIC—nothing was left out. So when you studied, say the topic of “macros”, beginning to end, you were a MASTER of Macros. There was nothing more to learn. And each reference topic contained:
- Introduction / orientation material introducing the topic, answers “the basic questions”, and how it relates to the rest of the system.
- Presenting the WHOLE topic, A-Z, in logical and complete sections in a sequence where later sections built on earlier ones.
- Repeat #2 until entire topic was covered.
- Repeat 1-3 for next topic.
- No topics left out, no topics only covered partially.
Each topic had its own TABBED section (literal thumb tabs in the manual so you could get to its content quickly without going to the table of contents). Nothing was left out.
And that documentation was a KEY LINK in propelling Lotus 1-2-3 into a leadership position in the spreadsheet market.
The most important takeaway from this: IT WAS ALL IN ONE PLACE (the reference section), including the introduction, all the way to through to the highly advanced stuff. The intro section did not take anything away from the reference section—it just gave introductory material for orientation and bare basics, while ALL of that was present in the reference section in complete detail, so if you were already oriented, you could start on a new topic in starting in the reference section and not miss anything.
If I contribute a great effort to something—I want THAT to be the result—not just more scattered documents that leave a new ST user with 4 places to look for each topic.
I wish I could get in touch with the person or group that could make the decision to make that happen. I’d be ALL IN. 
Do you know who that is? Thoughts?
Kind regards,
Vic
P.S. Judging from the number of daily installs of PackageControl Package, I’m guessing that Sublime HQ is making an absolute MINT. I’m a highly qualified writer (and a firmware/software developer between projects) and would absolutely ADORE an opportunity like bringing all the documentation together in 1 place and pushing it forward to be both complete and up-to-date with build 4200… while keeping my bills paid. And fix the sometimes too-sparce API documentation… Is Sublime HQ in a position to give that a green light? Id’ sure like to talk to the right people to make that happen. I could work on it full time if paid, and I would not ask a lot… Just enough to stay afloat with my bills.