> This illustrates a point I've mentioned before. Speaking as someone who > spent 10 years or so as a technical author/editor, I very much think the > term CVS should be banned in end-user-oriented documentation (including > the bug-reporting system!). If someone has never come across a > version-control system before, it can be very off-putting to be confronted > with this "geekie" acronym -- even I, with over 25 years' experience in > the industry, found it confusing the first time I came across it, and > had to go and look it up in an online glossary.
This is the exact reason I have added the http://www.php.net/manual/en/about.phpversions.php page to the manual. It explains the different version identifiers used in the manual. Well I know, that the word CVS is confusing many times, but I don't beleive that replacing it with "developer version" would be the right thing to do, as it will still confuse some people (there are prerelease versions too, which are developer versions without the latest CVS enhancemenets). > There's some other terminology used in various places that's rather > "techie" and I'd like to see replaced with a more plain-language > description -- when (or perhaps that should be IF) I have some spare > time, I'd like to identify these and put some proposals to the list. > (And, yes, eventually I'd like to get CVS access and actively help > -- I'm especially interested in the structured argument lists and > CHANGELOG proposals that are currently being discussed.) Cool ;) We need people to help :) Goba -- PHP Documentation Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
