The approach I'd humbly suggest for improving the wiki is to focus on example coverage, which in some ways is to documentation what code coverage is to code. Specifically, for every substantial feature of lift, is it demonstrated in some clear way in an example that's as simple and comprehensible as possible?
For most of these (feature, example) tuples there will be some example code but no corresponding wiki page. Any sufficiently smart person who reads the example code can write up a quick and dirty wiki page that outlines the structure of the sample, then annotate it with questions for committers about the motivation or other background for the specific details of the example. Then, when each one of these example pages is alpha quality, post the URL to the list and the rest of us can criticize/edit it. :) I find that for forensic documentation projects like this one, it's easiest to hit the ground running when you start by documenting extremely concrete use cases, then work your way "up" to architecture by observing patterns in the examples. -0xe1a --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
