On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 12:54, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 13:56, Karsten Wade wrote: > > * Should there be an editorial board? Such a board would oversee the > > Fedora docs, make sure we are adhering to our standards, filling in > > holes, following or advancing our process, etc. > > [...snip...] > > I'd like to volunteer for the board; it's what I had in mind when I > volunteered in the first place. Of course, I've found out since how much > work there is to do, and I'm glad that there are so many ways to get > involved. Yes, 100% agreed, I volunteer for the board, as well; I'm certainly good for the next twelve months (random term limit?), if we can stand me that long. > I for one would not choose to have a separate editors list. I would also > say the board should have some guidelines to help make decisions on a > less ad-hoc basis. Having said that, I don't want to create so much > advance detail work that it's impossible to actually get to the real > work. But at least a statement of principles would be enough to get > started. That would also give authors/editors proper guidance for when > things are ready to go to the board. That sounds exactly right. The statement of principles will guide in making up necessary process as we go along. > > * Also, much of the editing traffic can be in bugzilla, as each document > > will have it's own bug throughout it's lifecycle. > > Perhaps, then, XML patches for docs in Bugzilla should be uploaded to > Bugzilla for review by the authors/editors. Does that put too much of a > strain on Bugzilla's storage? I doubt it, but IANABSA (bugzilla sysadmin). Still, DocBook XML is pretty lightweight compared to software source; it's density is in the ideas within the words, and the tag:content ratio is skewed in that direction[1]. Bit-for-bit, I'd say our documents would be a very efficient usage of bugzilla space. :) - Karsten [1] Incidentally, as a writer this is one of the big attractions for me in DocBook. WYSIWYG editors typically burden a file with a lot of extra junk, making the junk:content ratio poorly balanced, and requires enormous amounts of content to even out or tip the balance toward the content side. DocBook junk:content starts out with a great balance, and keeps that balance as it scales. This is why I usually write in plain text first, it has the best junk:content ratio of all. :) -- Karsten Wade, RHCE, Tech Writer a lemon is just a melon in disguise http://people.redhat.com/kwade/ gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115 5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41
