Small fix in README.md

[ineiti]

Actually not sure if this is correct - but the only other occurence of sigPk is a BBSPlusPublicKeyG2. At least it looks wrong to have the sigPk be of type BBSPlusSecretKey...

[lovesh]

Yes, you're change is correct.
Secondly, some of the functions shown in the readme have changed, see this for an example. Until this gets updated, have a look at these tests.

[ineiti]

@lovesh #33 is from my colleague. I told him to look at how to improve the documentation a bit... Any pointers in what you think is the most important part?

We're using the library for one of our hands-on workshops, and the library is really great - incredible work! If we can contribute with some documentation, we'd be happy.

[lovesh]

Thanks for your offer to help.
The conceptual documentation is fine. But some of the code examples are out of date so they need to be fixed by looking at the tests I mentioned before. Secondly there are some new features added like more protocols for range proofs which you can see in these tests but missing in the Readme.
The API described in the Readme is low-level and a higher level abstraction exists and is documented here conceptually but lacks code examples which could be written referring these tests, mostly this one. If you haven't seen this abstraction, I'll suggest taking a look. Its more ergonomic than the code examples in the main Readme.
There is support for threshold BBS/BBS+ as seen in this test but missing from Readme.
Finally, which parts have you had trouble using and think could benefit from more documentation, tests or a better API

[ineiti]

Great - thanks a lot. I'll discuss it with @lanterno and come back to you. Is there already an issue regarding documentation?

[lovesh]

Thanks. Just created this issue. Feel free to ask any questions.