Gary --
I don't think something being published makes it untouchable. I like to
think of the chapters as "living documents" that can be changed at any time.
I think of the published docs as the most current version of the doc. In
my mind a document should only be republished when a new minor (I think,
like when 2.1 comes out) version comes out and the working copy of the
document will get all of the copy editing fixes.
No book or document is ever done, but we don't want to be publishing
constantly, that is time consuming. (Not that you are, I am just
rambling now, I forget the question. :) )
Maybe that is creating more barriers as Daniel would say, but I like
procedures so that is how my brain drifts.
Anyway, have a nice night all.
Peter
Gary Schnabl wrote:
Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
Because we do not utilize proofreaders and such, having anybody
accepting that role AND/OR for anybody to serve as a peer reviewer of
the chapters just before inserting them in the published state (where
they will most likely NEVER be further reviewed or anything) is an ever
present risk. We should strive for removing our errors at every step and
not make a rush to publish when it would be a simple task for some to do
so. All it requires is asking that we need proofers and indexers at the
end and additional reviewers at any intermediate steps.
Then, after at least a minimal effort is made to check these chapters,
they can be inserted in the folder as published with their flaws
removed. Be advised that the vast majority of my editing efforts came
from these very same published chapters that I warned about. And we know
how many errors of all kind were lurking there. Having somebody checking
ME is what I want, so as to avoid what transpired before. I welcome
having MY errors and omissions reported, commented on, and whatever.
More later...
Gary
