discuss: History of LDP
Subject:
Re: History of LDP
From:
Roger ####@####.####
Date:
15 Jan 2016 14:49:34 +0000
Message-Id: <20160115145007.GA4076@localhost4.local>
>Publishing ones work on ones own website is not always a good idea, unless
>there is someone available to take over the doc if the author is no longer
>able to maintain it. And this happens a lot. People get busy with other
>activities and sometimes even die.
Recently, or within the past year or two, I've been dealing with apparently
arrogant and young people who tend to be anti-social with their particular
political agenda, while exploiting their distribution's domain names within
their email addresses. (ie. Someone's Pythonic culture is better and faster
than our lower-level or equivalent language.)
Choice I have, either keep fighting and complaining while not being provided
the required leverage by the younger owners of the companies and organizations,
or just publish my writings to my own domain. Why continue aiding a crooked
culture?
So far, I see Wikipedia on-the-ball with these kinds of anti-social agendas or
so-called attacks. Sort of a waste of time being a baby sitter, but this has
to be done or else people start fighting over nothing. It's one of those
things that sound tedious and time consuming, but certain people are trained to
deal with and the situations are rather extremely easy to solve if people are
trained to deal with such issues.
>Another was the wiki problem. People would be more likely to edit docs if
>one could just do it without registering. But it takes a lot of effort to
>stop spam, including blocking ranges of leased urls that generate spam.
>If ldp couldn't find the people to deal with this, perhaps ldp shouldn't
>have a wiki. But ldp could have tried to evaluate non-ldp docs,
>especially ones on Linux in Wikipedia. The problem with Wikipedia is that
>it doesn't allow the original research which some HOWTO's contain.
I tend to agree too, as documentation is sometimes submitted via liaisons, or
somebody whom has intimate knowledge of a piece of hardware, but needs to
remain anonymous; not due to criminal prosecution or 3rd party licensing
conflicts, but for possible future contracts with such companies such as
Microsoft.
>Another question is: was not Poet (who advertised his business on his
>linuxdoc.com site which also mirrored linuxdoc.org) when he said we should
>accept docs in html? Who needs the other formats? If one needs text,
>it's trivial to convert html to txt. Accepting docs in html also means
>accepting docs in a format that generates html (linuxdoc, wikis, docbook,
>etc).
I've also written a few instructionals in the early days on other websites, and
completely agree. If a person cannot simply use text, using Wiki or docbook is
not going to improve their writing any more. (All instructionals tend to
originate from a sketched text-only format.) Writing text is the initial and
likely most essential step for writing an instructional. However (and sadly),
Google is not engineered to categorize *.txt files into their search engine
database, tending to require *.html type files.
A large number of writings for the past centuries only had text! Not too
further mention, some of the Wiki headings and indenting has become really
horrid when viewing on a monitor or display. How about just doing text with
some sort of version control system? ;-) Text being extremely easy and first
hand knowledge, while something like Git provides security and monitoring of
the files.
--
Roger
http://rogerx.freeshell.org/
