Sources of documentation: scored
Kind of each source cited by the documentation folder, with a quality score for the grey ones. Method: multivocal-protocol.md.
Style guides and project pages are tier 2, forums are tier 3. A page part that was not read scores 0.
Grey sources, scored
| Key | Kind | Quality | Used in |
|---|---|---|---|
| PEP 257 | standard (Python PEP), tier 1 | A4 M4 O3 D1 P1 N0.5 I0.5 T1 = 15 (no bibliography key) | against.md, baseline.md, frame.md, review.md, state-of-the-art.md |
| Google C++ style guide | company style guide, tier 2 | A3.5 M5.5 O2 D0 P1 N0.5 I1 T0.5 = 14 (no bibliography key; comments section read from offset 100000) | review.md |
| Django 2026 | project contributor guide, tier 2 | A4 M4.5 O2 D0 P1 N0.5 I1 T0.5 = 13.5 | review.md |
| Red Hat 2026a | company style guide, tier 2 | A4 M5.5 O1 D0.5 P1 N0.5 I0.5 T0.5 = 13.5 (first 100000 of 560825 characters read) | review.md |
| Viktorin 2022 | forum proposal thread, tier 3 | A3.5 M4.5 O2 D1 P1 N1 I0.5 T0 = 13.5 (first page read) | against.md, review.md |
| Red Hat 2026b | company guide, tier 2 | A3.5 M5 O1 D1 P1 N0.5 I0.5 T0.5 = 13 | review.md |
| GitLab 2026 | company style guide, tier 2 | A3 M4.5 O1.5 D0 P1 N0.5 I0.5 T0.5 = 11.5 (last 1818 characters not read) | review.md |
| Google 2026 | company style guide, tier 2 | A3.5 M3.5 O0.5 D1 P1 N0.5 I0.5 T0.5 = 11 | review.md |
| Google 2026b | company style guide, tier 2 | A3.5 M3 O1 D1 P1 N0.5 I0.5 T0.5 = 11 | review.md |
| Litt 2026 | community specification (GitHub), tier 2 | A2 M4 O1.5 D0 P1 N1 I1 T0.5 = 11 | review.md |
| Canonical 2021 | company blog by the framework author, tier 2 | A3 M3.5 O0 D1 P1 N1 I0.5 T0.5 = 10.5 | against.md, review.md |
| JOSS review criteria | journal policy page, tier 2 | A3.5 M4.5 O0.5 D0 P1 N0.5 I0 T0.5 = 10.5 (no bibliography key) | baseline.md, frame.md, review.md, state-of-the-art.md |
| GitHub 2026a | product documentation, tier 2 | A3 M3 O1 D0 P1 N0.5 I0 T0.5 = 9 | review.md |
| Hacker News 2024 | forum thread, tier 3 | A0.5 M2.5 O2 D1 P1 N1 I1 T0 = 9 | against.md, review.md |
| Microsoft 2026 | company style guide, tier 2 | A3 M2 O0.5 D1 P1 N0.5 I0.5 T0.5 = 9 | review.md |
| Ousterhout 2018 | book (author page read, not the book), tier 1 | A3 M2.5 O0 D1 P0.5 N1 I0 T1 = 9 | frame.md, review.md, state-of-the-art.md |
| Guo 2026 | personal guide site, tier 3 | A1 M3 O1 D0 P1 N0.5 I0.5 T0 = 7 | review.md |
| Procida 2020 | framework site (diataxis.fr, home page), tier 2 | A0.5 M2 O0 D0 P0.5 N1 I0.5 T0.5 = 5 | baseline.md, review.md |
| Procida 2026 | framework site (tutorials page), tier 2 | A0.5 M2.5 O0 D0 P0.5 N0.5 I0 T0.5 = 4.5 | review.md |
Formal sources
| Key | Kind | Used in |
|---|---|---|
| Lee 2018 | guideline article, expert consensus | against.md, baseline.md, frame.md, position.md, review.md, state-of-the-art.md |
| Pascarella 2019 | empirical study | review.md, state-of-the-art.md |
| Prana 2019 | empirical study | against.md, baseline.md, frame.md, position.md, review.md, state-of-the-art.md |
| Rani 2023 | systematic review | against.md, baseline.md, position.md, review.md, state-of-the-art.md |
| Wen 2019 | empirical study | baseline.md, frame.md, position.md, review.md, state-of-the-art.md |