[crossfire] Documentation / wiki

[Nicolas Weeger (Laposte)]

Hello.

What would you think of writing the documentation on the Crossfire wiki 
(http://wiki.metalforge.net) then exporting it to revelant files?

Having everything on the wiki makes sense imo, and it's easier to fix doc - no 
need to get SVN first.

I'm pretty sure doing a text export isn't too hard, and maybe we could 
generate some PDF too if required. The process could even be automatized.


Nicolas

___
crossfire mailing list
crossfire@metalforge.org
http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire

Re: [crossfire] Documentation / wiki

[Alex Schultz]

Nicolas Weeger (Laposte) wrote:
 What would you think of writing the documentation on the Crossfire wiki 
 (http://wiki.metalforge.net) then exporting it to revelant files?

 Having everything on the wiki makes sense imo, and it's easier to fix doc - 
 no 
 need to get SVN first.
   
IMHO this is a good idea. Also, there are already some documentation
files that have been put into the wiki and formatted to match it.
Another thought, is I think that we should consider using a separate
wiki namespace for documentation that is meant for exporting to the
server and/or client source tree.

 I'm pretty sure doing a text export isn't too hard, and maybe we could 
 generate some PDF too if required. The process could even be automatized.
   
This could work, though one note is if we want to do a really good job
of text export, we will have to do little things such as parse bulleted
sections, and perhaps even do automatic section/chapter numbering based
on wiki headers (things like section 6.2.1 for things in the 6th
non-title top level header, within the second second-level header within
that, and the first third-level header within that. Not a hard thing to
code parsing to generate, but does require a bit of smartness in the
coding :))

Alex Schultz

___
crossfire mailing list
crossfire@metalforge.org
http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire

Re: [crossfire] Documentation / wiki

[Mark Wedel]

  Seems like a good idea to me also.

  I'd probably add that while most documentation is currently in ascii text, we 
do have a mix of some other formats (postscript  html).

  I'd probably say that having more of the documentation be in HTML if it makes 
life easier probably wouldn't really cause much in the way of problems.  It's 
not like HTML is some obscure format that people would have a hard time finding 
a reader for.


___
crossfire mailing list
crossfire@metalforge.org
http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire