discuss: Review: Vim as XML Editor HOWTO
Subject:
Re: Review: Vim as XML Editor HOWTO
From:
Tobias Reif ####@####.####
Date:
1 Feb 2004 15:01:01 -0000
Message-Id: <20040201150326.GA4442@linux>
[unfortunately I'll have to unsubscribe, please CC me on any replies
or send them offlist, thanks!]
Hi Emma
On Sat 2004-01-31 Emma Jane Hogbin wrote:
> I'm sorry for the confusion.
Apology accepted.
> I will ask that your document be removed from the In Progress list.
> I assumed that because your document was listed on that list, and
> because your document itself requested feedback that you were
> submitting it to the LDP.
BTW I found the official process:
http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LDP-Reviewer-HOWTO/peerreview.html
:
"As a member of the review team, you will recognize a peer review
document as one the author has submitted to the discussion list,
specifically requesting feedback for inclusion of their HOWTO in the
collection."
> At this time the LDP accepts three types of documents: Guides,
> HOWTOs and FAQs. As you mentioned, your document is more of a
> "cookbook."
On the contrary; in the email you are quoting [1] I wrote that it
isn't:
'This howto is an organically growing collection of illustrative
examples and tips which might inspire some readers to create their own
personal XML editing environment and develop their own workflows, not
a finished one-size-fits-all walkthrough or "complete" cookbook where
each reader is supposed to end up with the same prescribed
environment.'
But yes you're correct in that it's more of a collection and not
really a guide (since the requirements of the readers are so different
a guide intended to prescribe the same result for all readers would be
less useful IMHO).
I think the document can be categorized as "howto", even if it doesn't
meet your or TLDP's idea of a howto.
> My suggestions were an attempt to fit the document into a more
> traditional HOWTO structure.
I don't share that goal, it's OK with me if my howto does not "fit
[...] into [your or TLDP's idea of] a more traditional HOWTO
structure". I guess in this respect I value progress and implementing
my own ideas over conserving some tradition.
I decide on one structure based on it's pros and cons (see my post),
not based on some idea of "traditional".
> Please see
> http://www.nyx.net/~sgjoen/The_LDP_HOWTO_Generator.html for an approximate
> structure for a HOWTO document.
If TLDP recommends to use this "Howto Generator" for writing and
structuring howtos then I doubt that you'll ever want my howto, which
is based on and structured according to a reasoning and thinking
process specific to the topic, scope, and target audience of this
specific document (see my post). This process can't really be
automated (or approximated) by a web form.
> Please email the list and let us know if/when you would like your
> document to be considered for inclusion in the LDP collection. At
> that time it will undergo three different types of reviews:
> - technical
> - language
> - meta data and license
> For more information about these types of reviews, please read:
> http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LDP-Reviewer-HOWTO/index.html
I've been working hard to write a useful document and continue to
improve it. Although I didn't ask for inclusion (which made the
exclusion verdict inappropriate as we agreed) I did evaluate all your
suggestions and did address every sentence of your review (and already
made some changes based on it), and I continue to appreciate any
feedback which helps me with improving the howto.
If anyone finds code bugs or factual errors, or experiences real
problems with the license, or finds typos or language errors, or any
other severe issue: please drop me a line (CC or offlist) at
tobiasreif pinkjuice com
Tobi
[1]
http://lists.tldp.org/index.cgi?1:mss:6604
--
Vim users, don't forget to
http://iccf-holland.org/donate.html
