Hi Brendan,

I would just like to clarify that the source for this comment:

Zone documentation from the Solaris 10 FCS era: "an administrator
> could have different versions of an operating system running concurrently
> on one physical system."

is not any version, past or present, of the System Administration Guide:
Solaris Containers--Resource Management and Solaris Zones. The concept
of a single version of the OS is fundamental to the zones technology. I
would not have written a statement to the contrary, and I would not be
alive today to respond to this message if I had (the zones engineers
would have killed me when they reviewed the doc :-).

Thanks,

Penny


Brendan Gregg wrote On 01/14/06 08:17,:
> G'Day Folks,
> 
> I've been reading through the style guide, and previous comments here.
> 
> On Fri, 13 Jan 2006, Michelle Olson wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi George,
>>
>>Welcome and thanks for chiming in, +1 from me. I expect the tools to
>>take care of formatting for me, my concern is the technical accuracy of
>>content and good coverage of the tasks, concepts, and reference
>>information. Style and consistency are important to me, but generally
>>take a back seat...
> 
> 
> About accuracy vs style,
> 
> I agree with the Michelle's comments above the most (+1). The best
> documentation I use is that which is accurate, detailed and explains how
> a technology is intended to be used. The style can be improved
> afterwards, once the "beef" is there.
> 
> Documentation that is clearly buggy, that lacks crucial details and
> leaves no clue about usage, isn't very useful. Even if it is well written.
> It may be fixed afterwards - after causing untold havoc with customers
> (eg, Zone documentation from the Solaris 10 FCS era: "an administrator
> could have different versions of an operating system running concurrently
> on one physical system." - oops!).
> 
> 
> About the style guide,
> 
> It's a good reference, especially if I want to write official Sun
> documentation. And if I follow every point, then what I write will look
> like official Sun documentation.
> 
> I see two main types of documentation contribution,
> 
> 1. If an OpenSolaris contributer wants to write OFFICIAL documentation
> that ends up on docs.sun.com (especially for a topic Sun would not
> normally find the time for, eg "writing an FMA messaging agent"), then
> reading a 278 page style guide should be the least of their problems.
> Representing Sun in such a formal capacity can't be taken lightly, and
> writing such authorative documentation is hard work. If the contributer
> accepts that, and Sun accepts their work, then great.
> 
> 2. If an OpenSolaris contributer wants to throw together some informal
> documentation for opensolaris.org (so long as it's accurate
> documentation), a summarised version or a checklist style guide would be
> much better. It may not look like official Sun documentation - but
> perhaps this is desirable. If some OpenSolaris documentation looks like
> Sun wrote it, customers will believe Sun wrote it and may take it TOO
> seriously.
> 
> Most of the documentation I would want to write would be the second type.
> I'm not sure what others had in mind - if we were to do more of the first
> or second type?
> 
> Improving man pages may be another type that contributers can help with...
> 
> ...
> 
> Back to the style guide: I haven't found a discussion on content yet
> (probably as it's a style guide, not a content guide). Would it help to
> have a section on content? For example,
> 
>    Recommended Content,
> 
>       - history of the technology: predecessors, similar products
>       - why the technology exists: concepts, problems it solves
>       - feature list
>       - strengths and limitations: compared to similar products?
>       - usage summary: with pictures
>       - tasks covered in detail
>       - usage with other products: eg, Sun Cluster
>       - supported configurations
>       - recommendations and best practices
>       - list of real world scenarios
>       - examples of real world usage
>       - reference information: websites, books
> 
> Sometimes I encounter documents that are little more than a reference of
> command line options, and leave all of the above to the imagination....
> 
> ...
> 
> PS. page 129 on the style guide has a broken link,
> http://opensolaris.org/os/community/documentation/glossary
> 
> cheers,
> 
> Brendan
> 
> [Sydney, Australia]
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> docs-discuss mailing list
> docs-discuss at opensolaris.org


Reply via email to