----- Original Message ----- From: "Dimitrie O. Paun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Jeremy White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 5:29 PM Subject: Re: Wine FAQ - call for a volunteer
> On November 1, 2002 04:02 pm, Andreas Mohr wrote: > > I agree that using a static web page for the FAQ part instead could > > probably be better - but for the troubleshooting content ?? > > The troubleshooting content is meant to be a step-by-step problem solver > > area (and it is, to some extent). Now tell me how you'd implement the > > same thing easily with an ordinary web page, without losing flexibility > > for very quick changes/reordering ?? > > Well, for one thing, this should not be in the FAQ, but a separate > troubleshooting section. Second, I *know* I don't want to see the > FOM as a user. I'm a user, hovering around the edges of linux and wine for several years, and I use this faq-o-matic alot. It's just bad. Beyond words! :) I don't understand > why you want this very quick changes/reordering flexibility. It > just seems we're trying to fix the wrong problem. We don't need a > tool to help us add hundred of pages, because nobody will bother > to read them. We need to think how we can present the information > in a few pages. Tops. If not, we are better off spending the time > fixing the problems, rather than documenting workarounds on > hundreds of pages. > > -- > Dimi. > > Kevin ps: I love to have the FOM or some FAQ telling how to edit config/registry to get debugger to start in same terminal or separate window though. And Lawson's sgml thingy needs to be there as well :-)
