Daniel wrote:
> I don't think those things are necessary.
The note about trademarks is a preventative measure.
Publication date is so peopleknow how old the document is.
I think including a note about build information is very important.
OOo 1.1.4, and OOo 1.1.3 might not look different to you. If you
write in an Indus Valley writing system, there are significant
differences.
Likewise OOo 1.1.5, and OOo 1.1.4 have some significant differences
for one of the South East Asian languages.
OOo 2.0 is a whole new ballgame, from a number of viewpoints.
OOo 2.1 looks like it has a number of minor changes over 2.0.
Whether or not the cumulative effect of those changes will make the
documentation obsolete is another question.
OOo 2.2 has enough changes to make all OOo 2.0 documentation obsolete.
OOo 3.0 won't bear any relation to OOo 2.2.
xan
jonathon
--
A Fork requires:
Seven systems with:
1+ GHz Processors
2+ GB RAM
0.25 TB Hard drive space
