Uwe Fischer wrote:
[...]
Who cares for a How To after it was published? Shouldn't it be removed
from the website or go to an archive when it was not updated after a
certain time?
Some guides are valid through the whole lifetime of a version, some must
be replaced by newer guides after a new release. Still this will not
invalidate the older guides: some users just don't want to upgrade with
every new release. So guides should state the version for which they are
valid.
I agree. Generally, there should be a mechanism to "archive" documentation
bits by flagging them as "applies to OOo x.y" once new versions are
available. For some types, this can only be done manually by the owner
or an editor. The current FAQ cleanup exercise shows that otherwise
we'll have much outdated information that is not marked as such.
Where does the "Getting Started Guide" from Sun fit in there?
The Sun "Getting Started Guide" does not fit in to OOo documentation. It
was written months before the first release of OOo 2, thus it is very
outdated. And it will be updated only when and if Sun marketing demands
this. The included installation steps are for StarOffice only, they
cannot be used for OOo.
Does that mean that the Sun GSG contains *only* StarOffice-specific
content? What if the Sun doc team helps working on the OOo GSG content
and just keeps a smalldocument covering strictly SO specific content,
like installation?
On the other hand the broadening of online documentation is underway.
Apart from our online help we will have more and more help contents in
the web. Do we have any possibilities to update the printable material
and transfer it into our wiki?
It would be nice to see all documentation on the OOo Wiki. Every
registered user can submit changes, or at least post some ideas to the
discussion part of each Wiki Web page.
Not all docs is really suited for wiki publication or collaboration
through the wiki. Commenting and discussion around doc topics is
needed nevertheless, I think.
BTW: Does anyone know if the collab.net infrastructure has
features for commenting or rating web pages hosted on oo.o?
The big competitors use the web for up-to-date documentation,
tutorials, tips & tricks, videos. What can we do to offer a more
modern approach to documentation?
A reasonable approach would be top have a good mix of doc bits
ranging from "classical" book-type venues for printing
(published as PDF), online viewing (published as HTML with
commenting and rating abilities), or editing (published as ODF),
to more collaborative types that allow everyone to contribute
their wisdom easily.
Also, more modular content that is available online would
allow for more up-to-dateness. Articles or Howtos that address
very specific features or tasks are easier to update (or create)
than a big monolithic users guide that is more suited for
teaching concepts that rarely change.
The ultimate question is not whether we offer a modern approach
but how we can offer an approach that is better received by
the documentation target audience - the users, developers,
administrators, and that has a broader contributor base.
The first issue would be addressed by better feedback channels,
easy commenting and rating bug submission. The latter issues
would be adressed by more collaborative approaches, like
using wikis, and encouraging everyone on this list
YES, THIS INCLUDES YOU, DEAR READER! :-)
to actively participate in making the docs better.
Frank
--
The OOo Documentation Project:
SIGN UP - PARTICIPATE - CONTRIBUTE
IT'S FREE! NO OBLIGATIONS!
http://documentation.openoffice.org
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
