> As we accept that any professional can > participate in the design, we should also trust our users to generate > and maintain their manuals by themselves! FGFS, FGFS-wiki, Wikipedia, > Linux, etc. etc. -- they all proved that it works!
Here's an actual user commenting on the state of the Wiki: http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=15215&p=149638#p149514 (he thinks it doesn't work). No idea what user you have been talking to. I think the FG wiki is a great place to store ideas, dump obscure technical instructions for specialists or document some special features - but I certainly would *not* advise any new user to learn how FGFS works with anything styled like our Wiki. I also have issues with Wikipedia - it always seems to move down to the lowest common denominator of all who want to edit an article. Basically, an article isn't bad as such, but whenever I compare something on Wikipedia with something a selected group of specialists has written, Wikipedia scores rather low. So usually I use Wikipedia just as index to find what I am really looking for. > Why shouldn't we, as the promoters of the most modern style of > designing, not also make use of the most modern style of > reading/studying/updating manuals, dictionaries, newspapers, etc.? Call me old-fashioned, but I read my newspaper starting at the beginning of an article and ending at the end. Jumping cross references is very bad for focusing attention and just generates a lot of noise which makes it difficult for the information content to come through efficiently. > Most kids today learn how to generate a Homepage and use "html" - while > "LaTeX" (and similar) needs some more "unique" > skills/environments/procedures. It is streamlined for the use in > "publishing houses/departments" - with the need for a so called > "corporate identity". It seems you still don't understand what LaTeX is for. You can easily turn LaTeX into both html and a printed book automatically - but you can't ever turn html back into anything resembling a printed book withd ecent layout without tons of manual input. > Please let me know if you have an issue with that - otherwise I will > start to setup FGFS-wiki versions. I think you can set up anything on the Wiki which you like - it just doesn't remove the need to have 'The Manual' if you want to offer a serious and structured documentation. My 2 cents anyway. * Thorsten ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
