A quick question why can't we build a PDF version I could put some
resources into this if needed
Sure. Tired of explaining this all the time (or searching up my
explanation in the archives), I have added this as an RFC, and can be
found here: http://cvs.php.net/co.php/phpdoc/RFC/pdf_problems?p=
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Timothy Hitchens (HiTCHO) wrote:
> Just a suggestion.. but what if we look at a way for the viewer of the
> manual to choose their version of PHP and then see it as it related to
> that version then the issue of PHP3 etc and removed extensions etc is
> not
> an issue anymore an
ject: Re: [PHP-DOC] Suggestion for a clean PHP 5 - Manual
>
>
> > > - removal of outdated extensions
> >
> > If the extension has been completely removed from the
> > source tree, then yes it should be gone from the
> > manual. Not sure if someone is ke
> > - removal of outdated extensions
>
> If the extension has been completely removed from the
> source tree, then yes it should be gone from the
> manual. Not sure if someone is keeping an archive of
> old manuals, just in case.
I partially disagree with this. Simply removing
them is not the a
(Crossposting to pear-doc)
-1 on forking to a PHP5 only manual. As Philip already
mentioned is not a good idea, whereas the User -
Developer separation does make sense.
--- Friedhelm Betz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...snip...]
> - removal of outdated extensions
If the extension has been complet
(Crossposting to pear-doc)
-1 on forking to a PHP5 only manual. As Philip already
mentioned is not a good idea, whereas the User -
Developer separation does make sense.
--- Friedhelm Betz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...snip...]
> - removal of outdated extensions
If the extension has been complet
> Regarding PHP 3 specific information, this indeed should be
> moved but not simply deleted. History is good. Another idea
> would be to move all PHP 3 specific information into a PHP 3
> section and where the information was, point to it instead. So
> something like:
>
> php3 note
>
> This w
Hi Thomas,
>
> P.S. Other questions like this will follow, like:
>
> Since we aren't able to build a pdf-version due to a lack of resources:
> Why don't we make the FAQ an extra document (esp. for 'bundled' builds
> like chm, pdf, bightml, ... - I've never read a book where chap. 43
> describes the
On Thu, 23 Jan 2003, Timothy Hitchens (HiTCHO) wrote:
> A quick question why can't we build a PDF version I could put some
> resources into this if needed and I agree with a branch for a PHP5
> clean manual for the future.
Okay, spend time on an automated build of a full PHP manual
built into PDF
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, [ISO-8859-1] Thomas Schöfbeck wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> looking at the current - esp. for newbies sometimes confusing - manual,
> where several old info and even functions simply disappeared, but
> several exlanations and even whole chapters (like 'Migrating from PHP/FI
> 2 to
A quick question why can't we build a PDF version I could put some
resources into this if needed and I agree with a branch for a PHP5
clean manual for the future.
Timothy Hitchens (HiTCHO)
Open Source Consulting
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: Thomas Schöfbeck [mai
11 matches
Mail list logo
