On Mar 12, 3:58 pm, cricket <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 12:48 PM, mark_story <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In the 1.3.7 release announcement, we announced the possible move to
> > sphinx + git fordocumentation.  The following experiments have turned
> > up promising results, and the temporary repository contains functional
> >documentation, that still needs some improvement.
>
> > One of the improvements that needs to occur is a restructuring of the
> >documentation.  The current structure of the cookbook, often confuses
> > both new and experienced developers, as its not the most logical or
> > best planned layout for thedocumentation.
>
> > We've hashed out what we think would be a better structure, but since
> > the community uses thedocumentationfar more than we do, we want your
> > opinions on how a new book should be structured.
>
> >https://github.com/markstory/cakebook-experiment/wiki/alternate-struc...
>
> > If you have the time look over the above link, and reply with any
> > comments or alarm bells about this structure, or any glaring omissions
> > that should be included.
>
> Thanks, Mark. My $0.02:
>
> I think it would be much better to put core components, helpers, and
> behaviors in their respective sections instead of later, in the "Core
> Libraries" section. It's the logical place to look them up, as well as
> to introduce them right after explaining what a component, helper, or
> behavior is.
>
> That's abou it. In all this looks like a really big improvement for
> thedocumentationstructure.
>
> One other thing, although it's not a point about the structure. Make
> sure that it's more obvious why 404s can happen when debug == 0. So
> many people trip up on this. It's a great idea but it's not at all
> obvious (which is the point, of course). And Cake has this mysterious
> routing thing (not to mention mod_rewrite being involved), so a lot of
> new users go chasing down that path (heh) instead of looking for the
> error in their code. I'm not sure what the text should read but it
> should be repeated in several prominent places in the book, IMHO.

Thanks for the feedback Cricket.  I was planning on mostly re-writing
the error handling docs as most of the behaviour has changed for 2.0.
Including information on how 404's can be triggered is a good idea as
well.

-Mark

-- 
Our newest site for the community: CakePHP Video Tutorials 
http://tv.cakephp.org 
Check out the new CakePHP Questions site http://ask.cakephp.org and help others 
with their CakePHP related questions.


To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected] For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php

Reply via email to