On Tue, 2006-11-07 at 14:46 +0000, Dimitris Glezos wrote:
I think it would be better to avoid having too much information in
FAQ-style, since although referencable, they are not very readable or
usable as a manual.
On the other hand, it would be great if we had that information in the
guides/chapters and compile a set of FAQ that the answer is like "More
information for this can be found <there>. For customizing it, see
Chapter <Foo>, paragraph <Bar>".
Right, we have to have a process that integrates the two properly.
Regardless of our individual preferences, knowledgebase-style content is
very popular and useful.
We might be able to think of this as part of the modularizing of
content. That is, can we write content in such a way that it is both
useful in a kbase and fits into an overall document? Perhaps, perhaps
not.
I believe the most difficult part of doing the Handbook would be to
decide on a good hierarchy that strikes a good balance between
usability/quality and reference-able.
Yes, and we might want to strike toward the former and let other works
do the latter, which is where formal (kbase) and informal (forums, etc.)
fit in.
Who should we contact to move some strings to free those docs? It
would
be *great* if we could use them.
We[1] called in Max Spevack some months ago to help make this happen,
since I wasn't able to get it completed myself. Anyone who wants to
lend support to this idea, please email Max directly with a personal
plea, useful cases, etc.; he agrees with us, but it is helpful to know
exactly what the community wants when we are discussing schedules with
RHEL team members.
- Karsten
[1] We == Rahul, Paul, and myself
--
Karsten Wade, RHCE, 108 Editor ^ Fedora Documentation Project
Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. |
fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41
////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\