Pith. sign in

REVIEW

What should I document? A preliminary systematic mapping study into API documentation knowledge

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1907.13260 v1 pith:XO4KCBZ3 submitted 2019-07-30 cs.SE

What should I document? A preliminary systematic mapping study into API documentation knowledge

classification cs.SE
keywords documentationstudiestaxonomyqualityresultssystematicbeencapture
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Background: Good API documentation facilities the development process, improving productivity and quality. While the topic of API documentation quality has been of interest for the last two decades, there have been few studies to map the specific constructs needed to create a good document. In effect, we still need a structured taxonomy against which to capture knowledge. Aims: This study reports emerging results of a systematic mapping study. We capture key conclusions from previous studies that assess API documentation quality, and synthesise the results into a single framework. Method: By conducting a systematic review of 21 key works, we have developed a five dimensional taxonomy based on 34 categorised weighted recommendations. Results: All studies utilise field study techniques to arrive at their recommendations, with seven studies employing some form of interview and questionnaire, and four conducting documentation analysis. The taxonomy we synthesise reinforces that usage description details (code snippets, tutorials, and reference documents) are generally highly weighted as helpful in API documentation, in addition to design rationale and presentation. Conclusions: We propose extensions to this study aligned to developer's utility for each of the taxonomy's categories.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.