On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 09:01:33 -0400
Timothy Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/26/05, Patrick McNamara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I agree that the focus should be on content, not form. However, I can
> > say from experience that form can sell content. One of our target
> > audiences is the corporate world. Given two documents with the exact
> > same contents where one is the dump of a wiki and the other is a nicely
> > and professionally laid out document with nice formatting, I can tell
> > you exactly which will be picked and which will be rejected.
>
> Good point. And as long as the documentation is in the hands of a
> few, that'll work. When we have to make something totally
> distributed, that's when things get difficult.
The solution is simple: every part of the documentation gets
a maintainer. The docs are discussed here and the maintainer
puts it into some arbitrary form which is then in some way
or another (like conversion OOo -> latex/docbook) stored
in the svn repo.
> > As far as wikis go, I've worked with them before and they can be
> > incredibly powerful tools. However they are not designed for creating
> > publishable documents. You can't go download the contents of a wiki and
> > print it out on the office printer for later reference. Ok, so actually
> > you can, but it's not easy or pretty. I would also prefer, if at all
> > possible, to keep the requirement, specs, and any other docs in the same
> > repository as all the other stuff. It makes it easier for all involved
> > to be able to go one place and get anything you might need.
>
> A format that converts well to both PDF and HTML and looks good in
> both cases would be preferable.
Both latex and docbook do. Both are in that sense pretty much
equivalent. Actualy both can be converted into eachother with
some scripts (+/- some formats). Personally i prefere latex
over docbook as it cluters the text less with formating strings
but that's somewhat like C vs Pascal.
We should rather choose the file format by the number of people
who know one or the other, resp which one they prefere to write in.
> > I must admit I'm still at a loss. For the time being, I would suggest
> > we start using the wiki. It is a very useful dumping ground for ideas
> > and I don't want use to get stuck trying to figure out how we are going
> > to produce something as "simple" as documentation. :)
>
> How hard would it be for someone to "translate" the wiki?
Hard. And i actualy do not like to write in a wiki.
I do not like to use webbased applications for longer
and important work.
> > Nihongo ga hanasemasu ka. *
>
> I think you're asking me if I speak Japanese, and I think the answer
> might be something like "chotto". But that's probably wrong. :) My
> background is in linguistics, so I like to take languages apart, but
> I'm not very good at actually REMEMBERING them. I remember weird
> stuff, like some of the honorific/humble verbs and some of the
> grammar, but...
ãããããããããææèãèèããçåãã
SCNR :-)
Attila Kinali
--
éãåããéãåã
_______________________________________________
Open-graphics mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics
List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
