Dave Page wrote: > > I looked at that URL, and it is good example of what _not_ to > > do with interactive docs, IMHO. The manual page is _very_ > > short, and shows no examples. The comments have various > > examples/cases, with corrections later to earlier postings. > > I would think this is not what we want. We want a longer > > manual page, with _correct_ examples that show typical usage. > > > > I know folks like those comments, but isn't it showing cases > > where the curt documentation just doesn't cut it? > > OK point taken. What about the issue that the comments get merged into > later docs, which is often not helpful if someone is searching the older > docset (because they are using the older version)? > > Perhaps we should then prune the garbage out of the old version, and > make the comments version specific so that we start afresh with the new > docs, but leave the useful comments against the older versions?
Yes, I can see keeping the old comments on old releases, but frankly, if it requires any special effort, it isn't worth the trouble. We are improving this thing so fast I can barely keep up. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]