[drupal-docs] Handbook v2

[Anisa]

Hm.  Okay, but the reason for the wikipedia comments is to give a place 
for the document contributors to 'discuss' changes.  Updates to the main 
entry in wikipedia can be done by anyone instantly.  The point of the 
comments is to ideally have a place for someone to point out an error or 
add some extra information that is ideally beneficial for anyone reading 
it. 

This perhaps needs to be thought through some more.  :)  The spiffiest 
handbook is the handbook that doesn't need comments.

Why do you want comments in the first  place?  What's the best, 
intuitive way to get the result out of the comments you want?  I rather 
like the idea of having comments being sorta like patches/issues that 
you can review and implement as they go along.  Trackable, assignable, 
make-special-blocks-able.

Anisa.

Boris Mann wrote:

>
> On 19-Mar-05, at 7:54 PM, Chris Messina wrote:
>
>> To throw my half-cent in, I think that this is a really good idea.
>> Pairing documentation w/ discussion is a great model and Wikipedia
>> proves this.
>
>
> Comments-in-a-tab is a nice idea, and perhaps doesn't need much in the 
> way of changes. Sort of like the trackback tab.
>
>> I wonder though,how we might exploit this model to better serve
>> maintaining documentation for multiple versions of Drupal or better
>> keeping docs consistent with HEAD?
>
>
> Kind of like "tagging" a version. Versioning is the big issue we have 
> to deal with that I really have no idea how to address other than with 
> extra functionality of books. I also don't think we're ready to tackle 
> versioning quite yet, but that in moving forward we should have some 
> ideas how to handle it. Basically, consider the new root books to be 4.6.
>
> -- 
> Boris Mann
> http://www.bryght.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://drupal3.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/attachments/20050320/f9585c01/attachment.htm