Re: (long) Re: [ode] Re: cart before the horse


Paul M. Foster (paulf@quillandmouse.com)
Thu, 13 Jan 2000 19:08:25 -0500 (EST)


On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Deb Richardson wrote:

<snip>

> As I said, however, first things first. We need a mission statement,
> and then we need to do some publicity work. Any ideas?
>

The idea here is basically to try to fix what is wrong with open source
documentation. That's what all this sound and fury has been
about. However, that's not a good statement of purpose.

So the first goal/purpose/target is to find out what is wrong with current
documentation in the open source world. We'll find that out from
subscribers here and from the other groups.

Next is to fix it, propose ways to fix it, create tools to fix it or
whatever. But that second step is truly dependent on what is wrong. You
could state, boldly at the outset, that you intend to fix whatever it
is, but without knowing, you may indeed create a "death march" project.

So let's say that this really is a two stage project. First we find out
what's wrong, then we decide what we can/are willing to do about it.

Now, what's wrong with open source documentation?

1) It's difficult to access from a single point/program.

2) Unless you search in very specific ways, it is difficult to find what
you're looking for. I.e. it's not indexed well or at all.

3) The docs are written for hackers. I don't know what we can do about
that, but it is a problem. Perhaps our ultimate purpose would need to
include a proviso that we do not meddle with semantic content of docs.

4) The source format of the documentation may not always lend itself to
output in other formats than the original.

Paul M. Foster



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Jan 13 2000 - 18:02:15 EST