Luis Villa wrote: > 2009/2/9 Natan Yellin <[email protected]>: >> >> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Dan Winship <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Dave Neary wrote: >>>>> - Should we just ditch the docs and declare the UI self-explanatory ? >>>> Definitely not. >>> Why not? Seems like no one has ever bothered to file bug reports about >>> the fact that they're wrong... Maybe there are as few people reading the >>> docs as there are writing them. In a corporate setting, people will call >>> their help desk when they have problems, and in a home setting, they'll >>> either ask a friend/family member, or ask on a forum. (If people RTFMed >>> first, we wouldn't need an acronym for it.) >> This is a moot point unless it can be proven. >> >> If we want to get rid of the docs, we need to run a survey/study first and >> determine how many people read them. > > Lack of bug reporting[1] about obviously broken things is the closest > thing we've got to proof, and has in the past contributed to (IMHO) > fairly sound decision making.
I think it is rather questionable to base such a decision on the absence of bug data. With most other parts of GNOME, this would be perfectly reasonable. But in my experience, most *users* are not aware that they can file bugs for documentation. Rather, it is generally believed that bugs are things you report for software only. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
