> On Thursday 21 November 2002 12:00, Diana Shannon wrote: >>. . .Can we agree on semantics? I don't like the term "manpages" because they >> imply we're making actual manpages.... > > You're right, as I said before there was some confusion about this already.
Definately...we need a common, accepted term here. > >> Given what we're discussing, I think it's more precise to use the terms: >> >> user reference guide >> developer reference guide > > Could we say "pages" instead of "guide"? > > Up to now what I like the most from this discussion are the following ideas: > > -one page per component, contains the essential usage info, maybe refers to > more extensive > "articles" about the component > > -every page has the same outline (variants allowed according to component > categories) > > -pages are easy to find based on name conventions, similar to unix where you > know that typing > "man SomeNiftyTool" gets you SomeNiftyTool's usage information. > > So talking of "pages" still makes sense to me. pages also have the advantages of being expressly a more ganualr item. I think keeping it an obviously small scope effort will make is mentally less daunting for those who will hopefully write them. I'm in favor of pages as well. So: User Reference Pages Developer Reference Pages > > -Bertrand -- "The heights of genius are only measurable by the depths of stupidity."
