Subject:
Re: LDP needed tasks
From:
####@####.####
Date:
11 Feb 2016 04:46:40 +0000
Message-Id: <20160210231215.04565073@ulgy_thing>
On Fri, 5 Feb 2016 09:12:55 -0800
"Martin A. Brown" ####@####.#### wrote:
>
> Hello David,
>
> >> * Review coordination: One of the biggest needs we will have is
> >> reviewers and review coordination.
> >>
> >> This role is a key role for our volunteer organization and the
> >> success of the organization can be, in large measure, attributed
> >> to the regular work of a person or a small group of people to
> >> handle this.
> >>
> >> This would require a small group (or even one person) who would
> >> drum the bushes to find reviewers for content and technical and
> >> then follow-through so that authors were receiving feedback.
> >>
> >> It is precisely the review and review coordination function of
> >> this volunteer group that drives the value into our
> >> documentation.
> >>
> >> Task deliverable: Presence and communication!
> >
> >I've been hoping to produce something for a while now, but I don't
> >know quite enough yet IMHO. I'd be happy to review (I'm not fast
> >though), I tend to have high expectations though (too much
> >documentation is incomplete), so please don't ask unless you want
> >the book thrown at you (and ask off list since I don't want to spam
> >it).
>
> OK, great! Thank you! There are no outstanding review requests at
> this time.
Your welcome.
> Speed is less important than quality, so I appreciate your high
> expectations. Of course, there is a balance to be struck when
> providing a review to a volunteer author. TLDP wishes to cleave to
> a high standard, however we don't want to alienate the authors.
>
> I'll correspond with you about that off list.
If you feel I'm being to harsh just say so. I don't feel I'm that kind of
a guy, I just read too many guides where the author uses the word
"special", or similar when describing the interesting part, the least
he could do is point me in the right direction.
I would ask that the author run aspell on his docs, it might be
a pain when using geeky words but I am *so* sick of finding stupid
spelling mistakes that could easily have been avoided.
It might be useful to distribute a list of geeky words locally. There
might be something online, let me check.....
<snip>
> >> For example, I might be a user looking for a
> >> particular document, a current LDP reviewer, an new author
> >> hoping to submit or an existing author. I think it could be
> >> easier for each of these possible LDP users to find what s/he is
> >> looking for.
> >>
> >> Task deliverable: New look and/or website.
> >>
> >> Size: Medium to Large.
> >
> >Now we need to find out what we like best for the look, feel, and
> >layout. Do you prefer small and simple, or big and eye candy?
>
> My vote? Small and simple.
Mine too :)
When does the competition begin?
I'm voting for Yucky Yellow on Lime Green with Hot Pink ribbons :)
We must use three of the yuckiest colours available, everyone else does :)
> >There are plenty of CMS suites out there. I think if you want
> >something more then ultra-simple that you might use one of those.
>
> Yes, Serge had mentioned one particular CMS suite that he had been
> toying with.
>
> >Borrowing from the first issue (see above) Maybe add a blog to
> >discus doc changes, this would allow user feed back/thoughts and QA
> >without signing up to the mailing list. We might even improve our
> >docs by seeing what the users are most confused about which will
> >inevitably change over time.
>
> Before we add another arrow to the quiver, I'd ask us to examine
> whether the wiki serves this need. If so, then no need for another
> software system.
>
> As you mention the KISS principle below, I'd also want to adhere to
> KISS in the matters of system complexity.
Ok.
> >> * HTML CSS file: Create to provide consistent look of website and
> >> docs.
> >> To improve consistency of presentation between the website and
> >> the documentation we publish there, it would be great to have a
> >> CSS file to be imported by the generated HTML.
> >>
> >> Size: Small?
> ><snip>
> >
> >I recommend against as some doc formats don't use css and are not
> >sgml derivatives.
>
> Though most of our content is published as HTML.
Agreed, but I'm afraid you might be leaving some work for the team down
the road.
> >As for the main site, I'd KISS, so that users could implement their
> >own CSS (for example via userstyles.org). Why you ask, the great
> >thing about Linux is that you can hack it. We should encourage that
> >in our designs.
>
> I have never heard about userstlyes.org before. I'd think that we
> could improve our visual consistency and still not interfere with
> userstyles.
Neither had I, but I was looking for and found such a site quite recently.
I'm planning on using some of their work.
> My main thought here is to improve visual consistency between our
> public face (TLDP website) and the outputs of the documentation,
> using whatever tools make sense. I grasped for CSS. Somebody else
> may have a better suggestion.
>
> Thanks for your message,
>
> -Martin
>
Hmmm, I can't think of one off the top of my head.
Question, do all the docs really need to look like the site?
The problem is that various authors across the net will have their own
guides and those guides will have their own style. Trying to get the
authors to contribute the said guide to the ldp might be a problem if
they like their style or if their doc format is, as I said above, not
sgml based.
Sincerely, David
