There are three things with the documentation: one that there are minor (yet annoying, and at times causing headache) typos/omissions etc. - these are worth being labelled and corrected with the upcoming revision of the document (note that Khouloud has already put his mark on this thread so it's presumably in the pipeline by now).
The second issue are systemic problems. Some chapters (e.g. TIM) are badly structured, others (e.g. the Synopsys IPs') are next to unusable. While the former might be rewritten with an internal effort, the latter was bought thus apparently there's no incentive to spend internal money on it.
The third issue is that much documentation is simply missing - not only a decent bridge to ARM's documentation (heavily diluted and fragmented and so notoriously hard to read that they own employee made a side business from rewriting it into readable form), but also appnotes, which now cover only a ridiculously small area of use.
I understand ST's stance on spending as little on documentation of the older chips as possible and simply milk them as much as possible; OTOH the recycling character of creating the new chips' documentation together with explosion of their complexity leads to disaster.
(Here, I wanted to link to my previous rant on the topic, but it hasn't been migrated (yet?) - https://st-microelectronics.jiveon.com/thread/46022-is-there-money-for-better-documentation-and-more-support )
> labels on diagrams if PDF unsearchable
This is a long-lasting problem in many if not all STM32 pdfs. This will be a similar problem to the forum - once a corporation starts to use other corporation's software product, it invests a significant amount of money/time/training/etc. into it and gets locked, so that the supplier can then easily avoid correcting defects which are not apparent at the beginning.
JW
