Subject:
Re: Volonteer lacks or(inc) TLDP on the turn ?
From:
Mathieu Deschamps ####@####.####
Date:
3 Mar 2005 16:40:46 -0000
Message-Id: <20050303164019.98584.qmail@web60405.mail.yahoo.com>
a democratic user feedback prevents this sinister cheats, it's automated,
one of the most viable. "A sort of statistic can be usefull", said you
I fell pretty much more it's unavoidable, a quality trend.
I have not thought about a technical solution in deep but other site do use
it and this bulble-sort roughly spots the best docs, the best effort
also (activity purcentile reviewer/author/converters).
Ok, I go deeply in the ideas I have now (ok this is very raw):
It has to be more clear, who reviews, who authors (write the original
doc), who converts, and so on. Who do what? What is in currently
been processed ? The basis of a organisation. People involved can
be sorted by age of LDP. (I said sorted, and not straightforwardly rated)
Oldier can put out of the user ranking list their best references in
their humble opinion and experience. This would balance the users choice.
Like in books and libraries I mean, there are references : huges, bold, complete
but long time coming, unnewbiefriendy, exhausting and what you want,
And there is opposite : quick to the point, light, not always enough and what you
want.
That's true that's like a major change : TLDP on the turn rather than in the hole .
KW : Accessibility, Personnalization, Quality
-----
Prerequesties:
Know the intended audience
Differenciate the people in the audience (readers/reviewers/authors/certifiers/ ..)
Realize where are the strokes, lacks to change and whre are the strenghs, traditions to preserve.
-----
Everyone -> Explain the job done in LTP (review/conversion/authoring/certificating/>>etc..)
Everyone-> Display clearly the way to follow resulting of user involvment will (diffrenciated audience)
Reader -> Define search criteria to user need (diffrenciated audience)
Reader -> Keep bold reference at hand
Reader -> Display user best choice ranking
Everyone -> Let the user choose this level of involvement.
---
I've just came to (from what I've said I'am a new born ) and I'am not pretending
to reform years old site policies, but I pretend that if LDP is self-questionning it's the best.
This is raw ideas, but this implemented has and
can work.
mathdesc.
"You can't invented the light-bulb just in upgrading the candle"
does somebody know from whom it is ?
Hans Bol ####@####.#### wrote:
I agree that a sort of statistics system can be useful.
But then you will have to be sure that this kind of system has to be
maintained by one person. If you let the user do it himself then a user
can influence the rate to put his doc on top of the list.
If you let the system calculate this kind of rating then the user can do
the same by adding one space or word to his doc and ..... voila! again
back on top of the list.
So it is a very good suggestion, but it has to be done by again another
volunteer!
Hans
####@####.#### wrote:
>
>
>> For instance, I want to share a guide (It's been written) so I send
>> a RFC to my draft onto this lists, very well. But first it needs to
>> be standartized and I'am routed to Authoring Guide/HOW-TO. Pages
>> later, I understand it was made for people who are in writing their
>> TLDP doc. I'd say that being a volonteer gets harder every day :)
>> Briefly speaking there's a lack of readliness. For me, it's just, how
>> come I publish under TLDP stds my written doc ? How to convert ? It
>> shoud not be 50 pages long ? Anyways, anycases 'am thrown in the main
>> uniq stream.
>
>
> Mathieu, are you saying that you have a fully written HOWTO which you
> now discover needs to be converted to DocBook, or have the DocBook
> standardised, and that you would rather have known about this a lot
> earlier? I think TLDP can assist with markup.
>Yes I'am now discovering :)
>
> Also, I know David has frequently suggested that TLDP needs to make
> life easier for volunteers.
David's all right he must be sanctified ! :)
>
>> As well there are different categories of doc, there's different
>> type of doc. Some guide frequently reviewed and updated are
>> references papers. Some other are complement, for example on a
>> particular architecture they could be less reviewed and updated. This
>> couldn't appear of the same basis. The most used could be shortcut to
>> have a greater visibility.
>
>
> That's an interesting suggestion. Maybe TLDP could use statistics on
> which documents are accessed and how frequently to somehow prioritise
> their maintenance?
>
> Maybe some kind of similarly democratic system (user feedback?) could
> also be used to help rate the quality of documents.
>
>
> Mick
>
> ______________________
> http://lists.tldp.org/
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER:
This e-mail and any attachment(s) sent with it are intended exclusively for
the addressee(s), and may not be used by, opened by, passed on to, or made
available for use to, any person other than the addressee(s). Stork rules
out any and all liabilities resulting from any electronic transmission.
______________________
http://lists.tldp.org/
---------------------------------
Découvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails !
Créez votre Yahoo! Mail
