[drupal-docs] First thoughts

[judah]

Anisa wrote:

> I agree with everything in this post.  ^.^  Including the headache part.
>
> judah wrote:
>
>> I just joined this Drupal docs mailing list to suggest adding video 
>> and images to the documentation but what I found was confusion.
>>
>> The discussions on this list are giving me a headache. You're making 
>> this all more difficult than it has to be. (when I say YOU I mean no 
>> one in general).
>>
> ^.^
>
>> What are the goals here?  Isn't it just to update the drupal 
>> documentation? I'll do the whole book myself. Just give me a site 
>> that has web based wysiwyg.
>>
>> Just setup a drupal site, create the table of contents in the 
>> taxonomy, setup one of the wysiwyg editors for those that want to use 
>> it and then starting adding content underneath those terms. You don't 
>> have to use the book module. Just add a very nice tree menu on the 
>> side and let people navigate with that.
>>
> Handbook should not be moved off drupal.org.

The only reason I say to move it offsite is that we will have different 
configuration options and operations that may not pertain to the 
drupal.org. For example, if we are maintaining the book and we will want 
to use or have the option to use the html areas. The guys at drupal have 
been resistant to this and for most purposes the drupal.org site does 
not need it. So I doubt they will use it. The other thing is we need 
content editors to adminster and moderate documentation and the content 
of the posts and also maintain user contributed content. Ok, to sum up 
everything I'm trying to say is that the book module may have or need a 
completely different configuration than the drupal.org site itself. I 
want this project to move forward quickly. Come to think of it, I think 
the guys at drupal will be glad to add all the features and updates to 
the book site that we need... (busts out laughing hysterically). Ok, for 
real, I reeeeally doubt seeing that happen. Maybe when we get a site all 
up and going and pretty they will say, "hey, let's put that back on our 
site". Plus there is drupaldocs.org. plus, i just talked to the guys at 
#drupal and they are not going to let anyone let us have the level of 
control we need to get the stuff done. If you want to talk to them jump 
on the irc and give it a go.

>
>> Is there problems with the book module? YES??? Then let's write them 
>> all down and give them to dries and say, "we want to do the book but 
>> we need these features fixed".
>
>
> heh...  my preferred response to this violates my principles of 
> happiness and lollipops...
>
> I will say that feature requests were filed for the book module.

YES. I sympathize with you because I know you have done this. But do not 
lose hope. If we as the HANDBOOK TEAM present a list of stuff we need 
fixed it will add a lot more weight to our request. We can even put all 
of our names on it and risk penalty of mutiny.

>> We *do* need to specify a few editors.
>
>
> Certainly!  I understand there are several Site Maintainers (3 of 
> which are Gerald).
>
>> Or we could pool all our money together and hire someone to write the 
>> book.
>
>
> No.  ^.^  It's a really sad state when you can't even write your own 
> handbook.
>
> OK, so, in your opinion, the needed thing is a wysiwyg thingy?  
> Perhaps the HTML Area module?  Or the TinyMCE one? Needs to be just 
> for the handbook text fields, so perhaps the TinyMCE.

YES! I've used the HTMLAREA and it is about 95% satisfactory. I have yet 
to try TinyMCE but I think it will be just as good a solution now that 
it supports image handling.

Before I say let's set this up right now I think we need to figure out 
the taxonomy issues.

PURGIN: "To begin with, the table of contents for the existing handbook 
has 740+ entries"

I'm open to suggestions but if none are better than I think what we 
should do is work it with the tools we have.

I think we should setup a list of table of contents in the taxonomy 
module. Then as we write content we will categorize it under the 
handbook taxonomy terms.

Then in the navigation we show all the taxonomy terms. Then when a 
person clicks on "Install" he will get a results page of all the 
documents that have been placed under that taxonomy term. He would see 
"Install on windows", "Install on linux", "install on mac" and he could 
click the one that he needs. That way we can better accomadate 
collaborative writing for now, for the interim.

After we get a good solid list of content under these terms we can edit 
together an official "Drupal Handbook Revision" that shows up at the top 
of the list would be edited version of all the best of the contributed 
content. But I would still leave up the contributed content. And content 
that comes in the future can be placed under the taxonomy terms too. And 
can be added incrementally to the "Drupal Handbook Revision" to include 
the changes.

Does this make sense? Any objections?

Best Regards,
Judah

-- 
re·gard
 1. To look at attentively; observe closely.
 2. To look upon or consider in a particular way.
 3. To hold in esteem or respect: She regards her teachers highly.
 4. To relate or refer to; concern: This item regards their liability. 

best
 1. Surpassing all others in excellence, achievement, or quality; most excellent: the best performer; the best grade of ore.
 2. Most satisfactory, suitable, or useful; most desirable: the best solution; the best time for planting.
 3. Greatest; most: He spoke for the best part of an hour.
 4. Most highly skilled: the best doctor in town.



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.2 - Release Date: 4/21/2005