discuss: the good the bad and the ugly
Subject:
Re: the good the bad and the ugly
From:
Shuvam Misra ####@####.####
Date:
19 Nov 2003 05:31:21 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0311191050110.1683-100000@sm.starcomsoftware.com>
Dear Tabatha,
> > What are the criteria for "good docs"? Is it anything not outdated or
> > is content being judged as well?
>
> I suppose any answer would be somewhat subjective, but here goes... :D
>
> I would say anything that has been technically reviewed for accuracy,
> reviewed for language (spelling, grammar, clarity), contains links for
> readers to get more information, shows alternative methods to accomplish
> the task, if available (depending on the scope), and clearly meets the
> defined scope, would be indicative of a "good" doc.
>
> In other words, if you tell us we can do something by the end of the
> HOWTO, we better be able to do it! :D
Your criteria make perfect sense.
I am the author of the Usenet News HOWTO. We (in Starcom) have put in
non-trivial effort to write it. We know that there's one key section
(about INN) which is incomplete, but otherwise, the rest of the document
is in reasonable shape (we feel!).
I would be very keen to know your and others' views about whether our
HOWTO qualifies for a "good" HOWTO? We most certainly want to put in as
much effort as is needed to make it so. :)
Thanks and regards,
Shuvam
