# Documentation understanding feedbacks

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899>\
**Category:** Meta Discussion\
**Tags:** documentation, education\
**Created:** [October 5, 2025, 11:32pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899 "2025-10-05T23:32:40Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 10\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![raman\_kumar](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/raman_kumar/32/26782_2.png) [@raman\_kumar](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/raman_kumar)\
**Post date:** [October 5, 2025, 11:32pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899/1 "2025-10-05T23:32:40Z")

</div>

I thing it would be better to have a system where reader can give feedback of how much they understood a section in documentation chapter. This will help us create better documentation system.

- They can give star ratting to sections that they understand ⭐. Total count can be publicly visible for each section headings.

- They can markparagraphs/lines of a section ~~part~~ that they could not understand. These annotation can be visible to Julia team only

- They can comment or ask questions on paragraph.

These feedback counts can then be used for editing or improving documentation. Please suggest your opinions or suggestion for it and hurdles we may have in achieving this.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![stevengj](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/stevengj/32/71_2.png) [@stevengj](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/stevengj)\
**Post date:** [October 5, 2025, 11:38pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899/2 "2025-10-05T23:38:18Z")

</div>

Are there any examples of an existing system like this?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![raman\_kumar](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/raman_kumar/32/26782_2.png) [@raman\_kumar](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/raman_kumar)\
**Post date:** [October 5, 2025, 11:44pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899/3 "2025-10-05T23:44:15Z")

</div>

Yes Sir, we can like 👍 a video or comments in youtube and also timestamp a location in video. Star ratings are used in almost every website. 😁

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![stevengj](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/stevengj/32/71_2.png) [@stevengj](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/stevengj)\
**Post date:** [October 5, 2025, 11:57pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899/4 "2025-10-05T23:57:02Z")

</div>

I mean a document-display system that lets anonymous readers highlight and rank particular passages.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![raman\_kumar](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/raman_kumar/32/26782_2.png) [@raman\_kumar](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/raman_kumar)\
**Post date:** [October 11, 2025, 11:11pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899/5 "2025-10-11T23:11:18Z")

</div>

Why not add _checkpoints_( a short tricky conceptual question ) like in **[Fundamentals of Physics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentals_of_Physics)**? If reader is not able to answer it then they should revise last section that contains this _checkpoint_. I think that it should be easy to include _Checkpoints_ in documentation.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Benny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/49beb7/32.png) [@Benny](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Benny)\
**Post date:** [October 11, 2025, 11:13pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899/6 "2025-10-11T23:13:05Z")

</div>

Documentation by itself is not interactive, it’s just a bunch of files. If you’re talking about the documentation _website_, then that’s not much interactive as implemented either. An interactive system would be more complicated, and a feedback system would be even more complicated e.g. YouTube. Anybody can give it a shot, there’s just not much motivation for it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tamas\_Papp](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/tamas_papp/32/25949_2.png) [@Tamas\_Papp](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Tamas_Papp)\
**Post date:** [October 21, 2025, 12:22pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899/7 "2025-10-21T12:22:56Z")

</div>

> [@raman\_kumar](#):
>
> Why not add _checkpoints_

Because the manual is already too long as it is.

While data on how readers perceive individual sections would be valuable, what the manual would benefit the most from is _rewriting entire chapters with an editorial eye_. This would mean reorganizing, rephrasing, and, in some cases, cutting material. This needs to be done from time to time, but it is a major undertaking.

> [@raman\_kumar](#):
>
> They can comment or ask questions on paragraph.

That would duplicate the functionality of this forum. If users have questions, they should ask them here. “Commenting” on the manual serves no purpose, we need PRs that improve it where needed, not exegesis.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![raman\_kumar](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/raman_kumar/32/26782_2.png) [@raman\_kumar](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/raman_kumar)\
**Post date:** [October 21, 2025, 11:20pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899/8 "2025-10-21T23:20:41Z")

</div>

You can quote/copy quote lines of Discourse.

 ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/original/3X/f/f/ffb70c6310adde29cb30dde041e63c1212bd0587.png)

Can we Quote lines of Julia Documentation so that when we click on quote to open that line or highlight?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![icweaver](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/icweaver/32/45764_2.png) [@icweaver](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/icweaver)\
**Post date:** [October 22, 2025, 3:31am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899/9 "2025-10-22T03:31:04Z")

</div>

I know it can be done [with Chrome by default](https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/10256233?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform%3DDesktop) at least, and Firefox has an extension too I think

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![langestefan](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/langestefan/32/207923_2.png) [@langestefan](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/langestefan)\
**Post date:** [October 22, 2025, 5:59am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/documentation-understanding-feedbacks/132899/10 "2025-10-22T05:59:09Z")

</div>

> [@stevengj](#):
>
> Are there any examples of an existing system like this?

The Home Assistant project has a feedback section at the bottom of every documentation page, for example: [Understanding Home Energy Management - Home Assistant](https://www.home-assistant.io/docs/energy/)

 ![afbeelding](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/original/3X/0/1/01070a618f6afdb6c1b7dce72d9d6c476839dd99.png)

These links bring you to the right pages in github issues. I think it’s a fantastic system, I’ve used it myself not only to provide feedback but also to make PRs. Often an issue has already been reported.