> > > Just to make this posting a little more "useful", here is a suggestion. It > > > is hard to ignore that the documentation has many typos and gross writing > > > mistakes. Especially the users' notes. It is not only ugly, it also > > > prevents words from being detected by the search engine. Has anybody ever > > > thought of combing it all and applying some proofreading? There could be a > > > group handling a side project in charge of that. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Luciano Espirito Santo > > > Santos - SP - Brasil > > > > Well, we do it from time to time, but not as a QA effort. > > Maybe it would be nice to have two or three people with > > "high quality" English knowledge to reread our English > > texts... I know I am sometimes quite bad in grammar... > > We have no control in any real sense over the user notes. It's hard > enough just deleting the useless ones, without having to edit the > others. They are just that: 'user notes'--not anything we've done--and > their content is the authors' own.
I am not talking about the user notes, but the manual content. Proofreading at least the grammar and text used in the manual is kind of a Quality Assurrance. Goba
