Should I put the setup guide on-line in spite of it being incomplete and ...? See issue http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=37513
I think it's generally a good idea to make draft docs available, as long as they are clearly marked DRAFT, as you suggested doing. (BTW, I prefer to put "DRAFT" in the header, not as a watermark, because watermarks can disappear behind screenshots and/or obscure text.)
So, to answer your question, I think you should put the setup guide online despite it being incomplete.
On a related matter... over at OOoAuthors, we've been "pre-publishing" some of the draft chapters of the user guides we're writing . Not many are available yet, but more will be done soon. "Pre-published" chapters are essentially done, except for last-minute screenshots and the occasional note to the author to "verify this when it's working in the software".
So far we haven't put any of those chapters on the Docs website, preferring to wait until those last-minute things were done and for the public beta of OOo to become available. Now that the beta is out, perhaps we should seriously consider putting draft chapters at Docs as well as at Authors -- clearly labelled as DRAFTs.
What do people think? (I'm going to ask this question at Authors as well.) Here are some of my random thoughts on the matter.
One problem I can see is that of updating the chapters on Docs quickly enough, when they are changed at Authors, so the Docs copies aren't out of date. (Any extra step adds time, because someone has to find time to do it.) One way to handle that in the short term is to list the chapters at Docs, but make the links to the files at Authors, rather than copying the files to Docs. Then when the chapters are published, copy them to Docs like we've done for the V1 files.
Would be interested in anyone else's opinion on this.
Regards, Jean
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
