John et alia, I'd be happy to help. I confess, however, to some confusion over the 'legacy' site and the 'new' site: we seem to have three: MIT, Google, and simile-widgets.org. The documentation link in the latter (for timeline which is the widget I'm most familiar with) points to the wiki at google code. Is it proposed that the docs on the old site and on the google code site be merged into the simile-widgets.org site, or will we continue expanding the wiki at http://code.google.com/p/simile-widgets/wiki/Timeline ?
In either case, if someone could add me to the wiki, there are some things I could help clarify there. Jon On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, John Callahan wrote: > Is there anyone else willing to help with SIMILE documentation? I'd like to > get a few more people to ease the load on any one person. > > You can put in as little or as much time as you want. Every little bit > helps. And there are many ways to help, such as... > > 1) send out your thoughts or experiences in using other documentation sites > 2) send out your ideas on how the SIMILE docs and resources should be > organized/searched > 3) copy and paste content from the old legacy site to the new site > 4) add links to In the Wild sites, blog posts, etc.., about SIMILE projects > 5) create new reference documentation for existing functions > 6) post brief HowTo articles, case studies of how you're using the products, > FAQs, etc... > 7) post code snippets that accomplishes a particular task > > > Again, any of these can help. I'm thinking we can have an off-list > discussion on the overall architecture and documentation strategy very > soon. If you would like to be involved, at any level, just let me know. > Thanks. > > - John > > ************************************************** > John Callahan > Geospatial Application Developer > Delaware Geological Survey, University of Delaware > 227 Academy St, Newark DE 19716-7501 > Tel: (302) 831-3584 > Email: [email protected] > http://www.dgs.udel.edu > ************************************************** > > > > Gmail wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'm also willing to volunteer. Assisted by Stefano; I completed moving > the legacy issues for Exhibit and Timeline to Google code after Easter. > So there are two sources to include in the strategy and planning: > - information assets contained in the issues and resolution > - following the excellent technical support demonstrates that "key > threads" often play an important part in resolution. Hence a > categorization and listing of these threads would enhance productivity. > > BTW, is there another source of documentation for the API's? I searched > for documentation on the HTML table importer but could find only the > code in the API source. Is there a documentation reference as well? > > I would invest some time to move, collect, or document the legacy > material and help develop the future references. Put me into the team > planning. > > Regards, > > Gary Gabriel > > John Callahan wrote: > > > That is exactly where all of this is headed. I'm willing to volunteer > (and help coordinate) as well. Maybe we can get a handful of people > together, develop a strategy, and start populating with content. > > From what I know... > > All documentation should be at http://www.simile-widgets.org > Examples, HowTo articles, links to resources also at > http://www.simile-widgets.org > Code apis should be at http://api.simile-widgets.org/ > Email list/forum at http://groups.google.com/group/simile-widgets?hl=en > SVN repository at http://simile-widgets.googlecode.com/svn/ > Issue tracking at http://code.google.com/p/simile-widgets/issues/list > > > IMO, It's be great to remove docs/resources form the old legacy site and > remove some of the components (wiki, download) from the Google site. > > - John > > > > > mleden wrote: > > > > Along similar lines, it would be great to see the "SIMILE online > content" consolidated to the degree possible. > > Right now, as I understand it, we have 3 main sources: > 1. The "legacy site": http://simile.mit.edu > 2. The "current site": http://www.simile-widgets.org > 3. The "Google site": http://code.google.com/p/simile-widgets/ > > We've all seen lots of confusion on this message board about where to > go for what. I find myself bouncing around between the three. > > At a minimum, it would be great to have any remaining content copied > from the "legacy site" to the "current site". The "legacy site" URL > could simply auto-forward to the "current site". I'm guessing the > major benefit of using the "Google site" is for the development tools > (source code control, issue tracking, etc). I presume that this might > be a little trickier to consolidate (into the "current site"). > > As of right now, I can dedicate some time to any of the documentation/ > housekeeping efforts (with a little direction). Just let me know > directly how/if I can help. > > -Mark > > > On Jun 4, 7:43 am, David Karger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > John, I'm reasonably certain we've defaulted to (1) because both (2) and > (3) require more substantial coordination and management, which we > haven't been able to offer from within the simile team (too little > manpower). I doubt (2) could work since it requires all contributors to > code a certain way. I'd love to see (3) but that requires some people > to step forward to join the doc team. > > John Callahan wrote: > > > > > Before I went ahead and started making suggestions about if SIMILE needs > a CMS vs a wiki site, I should have stepped back and asked what the > overall documentation strategy is. I should have probably also asked if > there were previous discussions about community building plans and how > things have gone the past few years. Sorry about that. So, I started > this new thread. :-) > > What is the overall documentation strategy? > > 1) complete community contributed documentation in a wiki/CMS, including > api references, examples, and HowTo articles. This seems to be where we > are now. > > 2) dynamically derived documentation from the code itself (could use > Natural Docs,http://www.naturaldocs.org/or similar, e.g., > http://dev.openlayers.org/releases/OpenLayers-2.7/doc/apidocs/files/O...) > This would require the authors to add much more info the code. > Community would contribute examples and general articles. > > 3) select a documentation team to create api reference and other > FAQs/important info. (could use Sphinx,http://sphinx.pocoo.org/or > similar, from restructured text, e.g., > http://mapserver.org/documentation.html) Community would again > contribute examples and general articles but under the guidelines of the > doc team. > > And I'm sure there are many others. Has this been previously discussed > or decided upon? Any thoughts on best approaches? > > - John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SIMILE Widgets" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/simile-widgets?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
