docs.python.org has several (many?) links to PEPs which are marked as historical and refer the reader to different documentation.
For example, typedDict refers PEPs 589 and 655, which, in turn, refer readers to typing.readthedocs.org.
As a Python user, I find this annoying. Would it make sense to indicate the PEPs are historical and provide links to the current typing documentation?
I agree that we should not rely on PEPs as documentation. As in this case, they can be just another hop in a link chain. PEPs often aren’t good explanations because they are written as decision documents and keep the alternatives that are no longer relevant. Lastly, their audience is core team members and other experts, not new learners.
I’d be happy to make the edits on typedDict and generate a pull request, if that’s the appropriate next step.
That sounds great, thanks.