Joel de Guzman wrote:
Rene Rivera wrote:
More questions...
Did not the various discussions and consensus to move to BoostBook
docs imply a consent to be at the mercy of the BoostBook style?
If not, do we want to get that consensus now?
Those who are using BoostBook already imply acceptance of its
L&F.
But I would think that doesn't mean that they imply acceptance into
changing that design.
That's quite significant, as it stands today. From the
moment it took off from Doug's initial work, then the various
discussions, on and off, then QuickBook, etc. It's
already taken many man-hours of work from us all.
Yep, including some of mine. But my personal worry in this regard is the
loss of effectiveness, and hence of my personal effort and time, of a
redesigned website if it's going to be "subverted" by the dueling doc
designs. This in effect is, equivalent, but mirror of your concerns
about library author doc design.
That is
why I am so adamant to not let it go and be replaced, instead
evolve it, incrementally, with proper consultation.
Sure, and speaking of that no one has commented on my proposed process
for driving that consultation and evolution I posted at the top of the
thread.
If there's no chance of getting such an agreement; Why should we
bother with presenting the docs on the website at all?
That's my apprehension all along. It can't simply be a majority
vote. All authors must agree. We can't realistically do that
overnight. Again, it's evolution, not revolution.
I'm not sure how realistic having agreement from all authors is. It
wasn't possible for the license changes. So I can't think it would be
different for this situation. At some point we have to choose to
progress the public image of Boost irrespective of what some authors
say, or not say. Right? Otherwise it would seem we would need the
approval of every author to change any common aspect of Boost.
Do we want to live with presenting the docs in the website with the
authors style? And hence have limited potential functionality, i.e. no
web notes.
IMO, there's no other way at this point in time.
Perhaps.
Have you
ever wondered why the W3C docs do not have a common L&F after
all the years, for example?
No :-) The limited set of docs I read on a daily basis, the web related
standards, all use essentially the same style.
--
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com
-- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com
-- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
