[erlang-questions] Erl_Docgen vs EDoc - when to use both?

[borja.carbo@REDACTED]

Both application Erl_Docgen and EDoc applications provide mechanisms  
to extract the documentation information from the modules. However  
when processed they do not have a common layout.

HTML files generated using EDoc have direct links to the type  
definitions facilitating the navigation when the information is spread  
across modules. Erl_Docgen have a tool to extract the information  
first as xml file to later on transform it to html files. However  
Erl_Docgen does not provide the direct links but just information  
about where (which module) to look for the type definition (with a  
normal text see....). I.e. looks like to use Edoc is much better than  
Erl_Docgen.

On the other hand the structure of html files from both applications  
do not correspond to a common documentation structure (and the  
internal html code is not compatible). Erl_Docgen generates the same  
look like as the standard documentation. Very good to facilitate the  
navigation between release notes, reference manuals and user guides.  
However EDoc is more oriented to a specific structure lead by one  
"overview" application central point. I.e. looks like to use  
Erl_Docgen would be recommendable.

So here the question: Is there any strategy to allow to mix the  
results of both tools so we can get the best of both?

I would be pleased to be wrong and overlook some informationon in the  
documentation. Do not hesitate to correct me.

Best Regards / Borja