Please do not make me click on "reference" to get to "API docs". I love diataxis, but dear lord, do not make me click an extra time to get to the thing I actually need 95% of the time.

Overall, the movement is good, except for how it tends to turn 1-click docs into 2-click docs (or more for folks who don't know that API docs probably live under reference.)

You are allowed to have a top level tab/link to API docs. Please do not hide those from me while you "improve" your docs.

I and my team did a full set of documentation for handing over a codebase to the client. A large complex codebase with accumulated history and subtle reasons why things were done.

Diataxis was fantastic. It took a bit of effort to work out what the page titles were to cover everything we needed, but then when you were writing a page it was glorious.

It was so clear what you were saying and what "voice" you were writing in. If it's a Reference page you're all descriptive, with diagrams and bullet points. When it's a guide you're more discursive, but you know you're just imparting information not trying to teach. It made it so much easier to be coherent and clear about everything.

I'd like to take advantage of the attention it's getting to point out that I am working on translating Diátaxis into other languages https://diataxis.fr/translation/, and you can see an in-progress version with some partially completed translations at https://diataxis-translated.readthedocs.io/translation/.

I urge people to not read this. Once you do, you will see all documentation will as the flawed and confusing mess it is. Ignorance is bliss!

truly. its the kind of thing that makes docs people justify their jobs rather than coming from a founder or user centric pov

Maybe I'm incorrectly parsing your comment, but what does a "founder centric pov" for documentation look like?

looks like a load bearing seam with strong decisions

survivor biased models

I love whenever this comes up. It’s a great framework for thinking about and writing docs.

It’s hard to keep documentation up to date, however, and I find that items like tutorials and reference materials (unless generated off versioned code) can drift pretty far over time.

A feature I like in concept that notion introduced with wikis ages ago was a “verification” timestamp, where you specify a timeframe after which the doc owner has to reconfirm that the doc is up to date. A bit too easy to rubber stamp, unfortunately, but maybe if it took the doc offline entirely without a more robust audit.

We just invested a good amount of time restructuring our docs for Diátaxis. It was helpful, but I wouldn't take it as gospel. The important thing to remember is that each piece of content should be one of the four types.

If you're embarking upon a refactoring / rewriting journey for your docs, the only advice I'd share is to actually read the website beginning to end before starting. Especially this page: https://diataxis.fr/complex-hierarchies/. The guide is (unsurprisingly) very well written, and it's easy to internalize the concepts because they're repeated often.

Ugh, I don't like that page and I have actually deleted it. It'll be gone soon.

There is a real problem there, and that page doesn't do a good enough job of dealing with it. I have something cooking that is much, much better.

Please post some kind of visible change notification (and something here) when you do!

It makes sense to me (I agree with it), but I also agree that it doesn't really deal with it. I look forward to whatever you're cooking!

I never saw the point in Diataxis, but honestly while vibe coding it's pretty convenient to tell an LLM "do diataxis" and get decent first pass documentation out of it.

I found it helpful in thinking about code and the approach for my current project:

https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview

In particular, it made it seem obvious to split up the documentation between:

- Overview --- readme.md

- Tutorials --- handled in various template files

- How to Guides --- embedded in the Literate Program code

- Reference --- the indices and Command Glossary

With tutorials, I’ve been enjoying handing my agent a directory of screenshots, talking out the process, then having it organize it all into a guide.

Huge fan of Diataxis over the years!

Ive been aware of diataxis for a while, but i hadnt considered such an approach. Will definitely keep it in mind for when im ready to generate some sort of docs. Thanks!

Agreed, a couple months back, I got cf to crawl the site and created a block of skills around it for personal use.

same, it’s great for first pass LLM docs

You clearly do see the point!

I’ve been loving Diataxis! My agents follow guidance that links from other file types to a reference file type must be one way. Stays DRY. Also to regularly cut long reference files into smaller focused ones and link from the main.

  tutorial/setup-buh-snuh-env.md
  how-to/configure-buh.md
         install-snuh.md
  reference/buh.md 
            snuh.md
            snuh-licenses.md
  explanation/why-we-use-buh.md

Posted many times. Here's the most recent time from 2024 (also has most discussion).

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42325011

How is this different from Divio's documentation system?: https://docs.divio.com/documentation-system/

Update: https://diataxis.fr/colophon/#origins-and-development (Divio came first).

Same fundamental ideas, but I got a lot of things wrong in that earlier version (which is several years old now).

Perhaps add "A systematic approach to technical documentation authoring" to the title?

I also admire what there isn't: certs, training, manifesto, "yah ain't holding it rite" blog posts, and job ads for a "Diátaxis Master".

I love seeing this pop up again. Our customer support team has been steadily moving all of our docs over to Diátaxis for a while and it's been a really nice improvement.

Diataxis + ADRs + C4 = The holy trinity of docs

C4[1]? Hadn’t heard of it until now. Thanks!

Really curious what the major differences are that have you preferring it over other methods / winging it.

[1]: https://c4model.com/

I had to search these terms, does ADR mean ‘Architecture decision record’ and C4 the ‘C4 model’? How do you combine them in documentation?

Another documentation model: Fabrizio's seven actions [0]. People read docs to appraise, understand, explore, practice, remember, develop, and troubleshoot, usually in that order.

It feels so natural and obvious compared to Diataxis' forced abstractions, where I'm still left wondering "what's the difference between a tutorial and a how-to guide?"

But! I'm glad for anything that helps people organize and maintain docs.

[0] https://passo.uno/seven-action-model/

> ...where I'm still left wondering "what's the difference between a tutorial and a how-to guide?"

I don't find this question difficult. Without looking anything up, a tutorial exercises a contrived example for learning purposes, whereas a how-to guide provides instructions suitable for real world execution.

Ah ok, thanks for clarifying contrived vs real. Like a videogame tutorial I suppose.

How to guide is for things which you want to do, probably not without going in depth or understanding the technicalities.

Example in our codebase

- How to clear the cache ?

- How to configure the logger ?

I liked the idea of separating our how to guides and explanations / tutorials, because sometimes you just want engineers to follow a specific flow without going too much in depth.