discuss: db2omf
Subject:
Re: db2omf
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
10 Mar 2001 07:16:42 -0000
Message-Id: <20010309231615.D257@lafn.org>
As a general comment, I think that authors need to put their effort
into what will return the greatest benefit to readers for the effort
they expend. In other words they should maximize the benefit/cost
ratio. I question wheter adding metadata to docs is worth the
effort. As we know, there are many docs out-of-date and many topics
that need to be covered are not documented. Some docs are not well
written. Effort put into updating and improving the clarity of the
docs is likely to be more beneficial than adding meta-data. For
example, suppose an author's doc needs updating. Which is more
important, updating it or neglecting the updating but adding metadata?
I've been maintaining change logs for my HOWTOs inside a comment
statement, but sometimes when I make a minor change I don't bother to
update the change log. It sometimes adds on an overhead of say 20% to
document a change and this is just too much. I sometimes wonder if I
should keep any change log at all. Couldn't someone get diffs from
CVS to see what changes were made? Spending more time updating and
not keeping a change log might be the best solution. Of course if I
completely revised it and went over the entite doc, then it might be
useful to spend 1% of the effort to note that change.
