[docs] [issue35651] PEP 257 (active) references PEP 258 (rejected) as if it were active

[Mark Amery]

New submission from Mark Amery <markamery at btinternet.com>:

PEP 257 says:

> Please see PEP 258, "Docutils Design Specification" [2], for a detailed description of attribute and additional docstrings.

But PEP 258 is rejected. It doesn't seem coherent that an active PEP can defer some of its details to a rejected PEP - and indeed it makes me unsure how much of the surrounding commentary in PEP 257 to treat as active. e.g. should I treat the entire concepts of "attribute docstrings" and "additional docstrings" as rejected, given the rejection of PEP 258, or are they still part of the current spec, given that they're referenced in PEP 257 prior to any mention of PEP 258? It's currently completely unclear.

----------
assignee: docs at python
components: Documentation
messages: 332940
nosy: ExplodingCabbage, docs at python
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: PEP 257 (active) references PEP 258 (rejected) as if it were active
versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.4, Python 3.5, Python 3.6, Python 3.7, Python 3.8

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue35651>
_______________________________________