On Dec 17, 2005, at 12:56 PM, Anil Gangolli wrote:
Nice doc!
I think it's a step in the right direction to revision control docs
with sources and versioning will be easier than before, but I think
we'll still have some problems with this because the stored forms are
basically binary blobs.
I'd like to push gently in the direction of using a source form that
is fundamentally text-based (XML, HTML or a wiki-based markup) and do
all of the guides (user, installation, admin and configuration) in a
uniform format. This will allow incremental contributions from more
than one source, contributions from readers as patches, merging across
branches, and understanding what's changed (or what wasn't updated) in
the docs from release to release.
I don't know about you, but for a user guide, I would *much* rather use
a word processor than edit raw XML. Plus, getting tech writers to help
out might be a lot easier if we use friendly software like Open Office.
Open Office 2.0 uses ODF as it's native format and I believe there's a
XML version of that, but I wouldn't be surprised if the XML produced
does not produce useful SVN merges and diffs.
- Dave
