discuss: Clarifying confusion over editing vs reviewer
Subject:
Re: Clarifying confusion over editing vs reviewer
From:
David Merrill ####@####.####
Date:
20 May 2002 22:26:51 -0000
Message-Id: <20020520231907.GT32175@lupercalia.net>
On Mon, May 20, 2002 at 02:11:41PM -0400, Tabatha Persad wrote:
> On Monday 20 May 2002 12:36, Joy Y Goodreau wrote:
> > I'm not really concerned about what name you give to what me and my
> > review staff, but I do want it to be clear what the
> > reviewers/editors do at the LDP.
>
> I can see that to many people the term editor still carries a stigma,
> which is unfortunate. Either way, set it in stone and I'll update my
> signature either way, no matter to me. I still enjoy doing whatever
> it is being called!
Definitely! In an intimate conversion whose details I shall not go
into :-), while discussing with my bf the funny names people have for
their genitalia, he said, "I don't care what you call it; it's what
you do with it that counts!"
> > 1. They contact the author and let them know that they will be
> > working with the document. This includes a request to work in the
> > source. Most authors have responded favorably that we fix
> > grammatical errors in the source. It creates less work for them and
> > they seem to appreciate it. In the instances where source is
> > changing rapidly or they anticipate making changes within the
> > source before we can get the revision back to them, we don't work
> > in the source. This is also an option for authors who do not want
> > us to touch the source. I will tell you that this has been rare in
> > my experience. The authors I have dealt with are eager to make the
> > documentation better and more readable, and if we can save them
> > time by working in the source, they are fine with it. It has been
> > great to work with these authors who see their documents as
> > belonging to the community and want them to be better.
>
> What about conversion from older formats to DocBook? I'm not trying
> to stir up a debate but it is my understanding that DB4.1 sgml and
> 4.1.2 XML are the most recent flavors. Is this something that is
> being done in the same manner as above? I have noticed some
> conversions mentioned in updates. Just curious.
Conversions are a Good Thing. The general sentiment here, with a few
dissenters such as David Lawyer, is in favor of DocBook. So asking an
author to consider converting is okay. But we can not press the issue.
If they like something else, such as LinuxDoc, then so be it.
> > I must say that the authors responses to the new document editing
> > has been phenomenal. Major improvements have been made to many of
> > the documents. I have been impressed with the responsiveness of the
> > authors. The new document reviews have been going on since April
> > 23. IF your document was submitted before then, it was NOT subject
> > to a review before going onto the site. The review for all new
> > documents is a NEW policy. We had it as a goal for a year, and it
> > became reality on April 23.
>
> I have also had great experiences working with new authors and their
> submissions! I've made sure that recommendations were followed by
> logical reasons, and have offered my help (being fortunate enough to
> have the time) to get through using some of the tools as well. I've
> so far received great feedback. SGML and proper licenses are now
> applicable where they were previously text files without this
> information.
I also had almost universal support and good relations with authors.
They are almost always completely willing to fill any requirements we
set as long as they are reasonable. When they do not fill what we ask,
it is because they just don't have the time or the skills to do it, in
my experience.
We have some wonderful authors, who do most of what makes the LDP as
good as it is. And they appreciate help to make their documents even
better.
--
David C. Merrill http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project ####@####.####
Lead Developer http://www.tldp.org
Microsoft allowed us to [remove Internet Explorer from Windows] but we don't
think we should have to ask permission every time we want to make some
minor software modification. Windows is an operating system, not a
religion.
--Gateway Computer Chairman Ted Waitt
