discuss: Planning to publish new document
Subject:
Re: Planning to publish new document
From:
Derek Hans ####@####.####
Date:
26 Feb 2003 02:16:30 -0000
Message-Id: <3E5C2378.8010308@gmx.net>
Hi,
I was just wondering - did anyone ever consider using Wiki-style editing
for the documentation?
I have the impression that this would have several advantages.
It would simplify / make possible the collaboration of several authours
during the initial creation of new documentation.
It would simplify the maintenance of the documets, as the changes can be
made directly online.
It would encourage other people to add their own experiences /
information they would have found useful while they were solving a
problem for which they used the documentation.
It would help keeping the documentation up to date, as users that notice
information that is out of date could immediately change them.
By letting others easily contribute to the content, this would diminish
the workload on the official maintainer.
The review process should also be simplified by its use.
In general, wiki-based documentation simply has the possibility of being
richer and more dynamic, content-wise.
If people want to download the documentiation, a zipped file of the
current state could be created on the fly, or, if this is too resource
heavy, a monthly snapshot could be made that is used for download
purposes during the following month. This could also be used by mirrors.
Derek
Tabatha Persad wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>By way of explanation of what I'm up to, I'm loosely following the
>review process for newly submitted documentation, outlined in the
>Reviewer HOWTO:
>
>http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LDP-Reviewer-HOWTO/newdocs.html
>
>Instead of announcing newly submitted documents to the discussion list
>myself, I've been engaging the authors in this, as I am constantly
>reviewing documents.
>
>You should know that out of all our reviewers, none are currently
>active, so lately I've been coordinating and reviewing all at the same
>time. I'm not complaining - as I've said many times, I love the work.
>But I can't follow the guidelines in the Reviewer HOWTO to the letter
>due to these circumstances.
>
>So, hopefully that sheds a little light on how I'm going about things.
>I don't mind reorganizing this process a bit if anyone knows a way to
>make this easier!
>
>Tabatha
>
>
>On Tue, 2003-02-25 at 14:22, Evgueni Tzvetanov wrote:
>
>
>>Thanks Greg,
>>
>>I'm sorry. My fault, that I did not read whatever needed to go through
>>the whole process...
>>I will send the new document notification.
>>
>>I am also subscribed to the group already and I have tried to send the
>>document though this address ####@####.#### which was wrong.
>>I'll try to make it easier for you guys to work on it.
>>
>>I am not against reviews. On the contrary. There should be a review and
>>discussion so that the document will be useful and will not contain
>>unwanted materials. I am totally for early stage of editing (review) of
>>the document, even as ideas only a topic could be discussed before one
>>could write a document down. My thought was about the way it could be
>>done. Anyway, I'll stick to the established rules.
>>
>>Regards!
>>
>>
>>Greg Ferguson wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>On Tue, 25 Feb 2003 16:52:30 -0500 Evgueni Tzvetanov ####@####.#### wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>...
>>>>I can see that currently either there is no such mechanism on
>>>>tldp.org or it is hidden to all readers, except the chosen ones.
>>>>...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Not true. It's available - http://tldp.org/authors/inprogress.html
>>>
>>>See the LDP Author Guide for info on the overall process.
>>>Or for the encapulated version, see the new LDP FAQ:
>>>http://www.tldp.org/FAQ/LDP-FAQ/
>>>
>>>The reasoning for doing a review is sound. There needs to be some
>>>level of quality control prior to publishing, the review process
>>>allows for that. Tabatha was merely making *suggestions*.
>>>
>>>The email alias(es) can also be established, although no one
>>>has made use of them in the past (yes, we tried it).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
