discuss: man pages


Previous by date: 15 May 2003 18:47:09 -0000 Re: man pages, Machtelt Garrels
Next by date: 15 May 2003 18:47:09 -0000 Re: man pages, Kurt Pfeifle
Previous in thread: 15 May 2003 18:47:09 -0000 Re: man pages, Machtelt Garrels
Next in thread: 15 May 2003 18:47:09 -0000 Re: man pages, Kurt Pfeifle

Subject: Re: man pages
From: Togan Muftuoglu ####@####.####
Date: 15 May 2003 18:47:09 -0000
Message-Id: <20030515184701.GR1190@dinamizm.com>

* Howard Shane; ####@####.#### on 15 May, 2003 wrote:
>I've been disappointed with most of the info pages I've consulted. The 
>info page in question is usually a) marginally more readable, b) less 
>comprehensive, or c) doesn't exist for the program in question. (Rarely 
>they do get it right, though, as in the textutils documentation.)

Well said, being able to program does not necessarily mean being able to
document what is intended. IMHO 95% of info and man pages do suck and
thats one of the reasons I pay X amount of dollars to publishers like
Oreilly to get a better documentation of what I should have already by
having the program.



-- 

Togan Muftuoglu


Previous by date: 15 May 2003 18:47:09 -0000 Re: man pages, Machtelt Garrels
Next by date: 15 May 2003 18:47:09 -0000 Re: man pages, Kurt Pfeifle
Previous in thread: 15 May 2003 18:47:09 -0000 Re: man pages, Machtelt Garrels
Next in thread: 15 May 2003 18:47:09 -0000 Re: man pages, Kurt Pfeifle


  ©The Linux Documentation Project, 2014. Listserver maintained by dr Serge Victor on ibiblio.org servers. See current spam statz.