Adding back missing docs

[eliotwrobson]

Added back missing docs page from move to mkdocs. Uses change from #194

[coveralls]

coverage: 99.64%. remained the same
when pulling 6e3090a on eliotwrobson:add_back_missing_docs
into 3444b17 on caleb531:develop.

[caleb531]

This looks good! But quick question, and something I've been wondering:

I suppose I was under the impression that we'd be converting all of the Markdown pages to docstrings within the code. But it seems like we'll be keeping both? Can you please clarify where Markdown is being replaced by docstrings and where it isn't?

[eliotwrobson]

@caleb531 to your question, I think it makes sense to at least keep all of the API documentation in docstrings and have that generated by mkdocs. Putting everything in a docstring doesn't make sense for some of the documentation, especially in the case of long examples or extended discussions, such as the automaton characteristics here. However, I think this is the only case where there was some extended discussion in the old API documentation that didn't really fit into a docstring.

In this case, I think the change is more organizational than anything else (as the new docs page describes general behavior rather than specific methods), and it's questionable whether this discussion really should have ever been included as part of the API, rather than as part of a more user-facing quick-start guide.

I think this is a good question though, since we will probably add more documentation based on feedback from the upcoming review. Going to go ahead and merge, and if the organization of this page seems confusing we can discuss moving it somewhere else.