[drupal-docs] comments

[Anisa]

The way I was rewriting it was mendokusai, but turned the center of the 
page into a place where you could use HTML.  Again, not saying this is 
the best way for anything, it's really rather tedious to make the pages 
initially, but an option anyway.  And you can cut and paste.  ^.^

You mentioned the forum and the project module...  I think for certain 
project issues, a message is sent to the list anyway.  But then how do 
you take that text, with all its links and html, to the book?

Using Drupal's own features is all well and good, but the point is 
always to make good documentation.  Ne.  :)  As you noted, a place for 
drafts is very necessary, and should be considered when thinking up a 
serious, fluid, workflow.





Charlie Lowe wrote:

>LOL
>
>Well, there's some discrepency over what the current workflow is for 
>revising the book with V2 and the wiki going on, too. I'm just following 
>Djun's lead and the previous process and revising in the existing 
>handbook and thinking all the documentation should go there.
>
>If we were going to go with that, I do think we could use a space for 
>posting drafts. By that I mean, sometimes we might like to get feedback 
>on a really rough draft before replacing the original book page. I know 
>I would. Plus, having a place to post drafts means that a book page 
>isn't down because a new version is in the moderation queue waiting to 
>be approved (this is another issue: not sure we need a moderation queue 
>so much as a notification engine for revisions and new book pages so 
>that book maintainers know when changes have been made).
>
>The wiki for me is out because
>
>(1) I think the process should stay on drupal.org (eat your own dog 
>food, makes the process more transparent to the community, easier to 
>keep track of when everything is on drupal.org)
>
>(2) the advantage of wiki markup is negated since what goes in the 
>handbook should have HTML formatting.
>
>Two spaces for this on drupal.org: Forums or Project Issues. Now I've 
>used project issues for documentation construction on http://osddp.org/. 
>I tend to like using threaded comments for discussion of text over just 
>the project issue without it. Plus, if a draft is posted as a node in a 
>forum, it "looks" like it would in the handbook (the project issues have 
>a different display); the visual similarity helps a little bit, I think. 
>So for me, I'd probably want to post something to the Documentation 
>Forum, then notice the doc list for feedback. Easy enough for anyone to 
>post comments or revisions in the comment space.
>
>Anisa wrote:
>  
>
>>Hm.  Well, I don't personally think it's an efficient workflow to do 
>>everything on the wiki and then transfer it over.  It's not a 
>>particularly efficient kind of wiki.  I don't make it because I think it 
>>will be better, but just to provide a place in case someone wants to use it.
>>
>>The current workflow is... what, precisely?
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://drupal3.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/attachments/20050518/afcdcb2e/attachment.htm