I feel that the document structure Bjornke and Andre have crafted
offers the best of both worlds.
It makes use of the official docs while integrating what is
functionally an editable, wiki-like user interface for user
extensions, clarifications, and examples. Web-based Wikis can't
match the form or function. Clearly the interface could improve
cosmetically and even functionally, I guess (there's always room for
improvement). But it's a great model.
Mark
On Oct 18, 2007, at 2:53 AM, Richmond Mathewson wrote:
Timothy Miller wrote:
"Docs too terse. Experienced users comprehend. Others
struggle."
Many people have accused me of prolixity; never the
reverse :)
I am perfectly happy to supply the password for the
wiki to those who e-mail me off list and have
recognisable names - don't really want the wiki full
of pictures of people's anatomy or silly adverts for
v*^gr$.
sincerely, Richmond Mathewson
____________________________________________________________
A Thorn in the flesh is better than a failed Systems Development
Life Cycle.
____________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the
answer. Try it
now.
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
-Mark
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
