Paul Newby wrote:
>
> > While an all-midgard solution may be a nice showcase, w-agora
> > (http://w-agora.araxe.fr/) would do well enough, and is easy to
> > set up.
>
> Looks good, although their demo forum doesn't seem to be working
> this morning.
>
> A possible advantage of a Midgard solution is the potential
> to restructure the display as the number of contributions grows
> and to allow in-place editing by a number of contributors.
>
> Initially it might be best to group the contributions into a limited
> set of topics; something like:
>
> Installation
> Site configuration and development
> Functions: general usage
> Functions: record types
> Functions: topic and article functions
> Functions: person and group functions
> Functions: host and page functions
> Functions: style and element functions
> Functions: other
A relatively easy way to do this would be to setup a topic tree to hold
comments, and have suptopics under that named by the manual URL, so
a topic /manualcomments/function.is-topic-owner, /manualcomments/x34,
etc.
Each subtopic could collect comments in articles, and the /manual/ page
can be altered to show those comments. The get_by_name functions from
tricks
& tips would make this scheme workable. Oh, and we'd need an interface
for
people to add comments, of course.
emile
--
This is The Midgard Project's mailing list. For more information,
please visit the project's web site at http://www.midgard-project.org
To unsubscribe the list, send an empty email message to address
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
