On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 10:16 +0200, Peter Boy wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 23.08.2005, 17:26 -0700 schrieb Karsten Wade: > > We had a lively discussion about Wiki at the FDSCo meeting this week. > [...] > > To get those, we need to move our process to include the Wiki. > That's a very good strategy, I think. > > > * Create a structure in the Wiki that will let us host a Docs/Drafts/Foo > > and a Docs/Foo, to help differentiate draft content > > Maybe I missunderstand that, but wouldn't it be preferrable to have one > integrated table with all content, marked as doc/draft/wiki in one > column to provide an easy overview and orientation for the user? For the > detail view you can easily organize it in a /doc /doc/draft/ ... > structure to fulfill the technical needs of the infrastructure. The problem I see with that approach is that with Drafts, we probably want to *discourage* users who are casually browsing the Wiki from gleaning incorrect guidance. If they can read a table full of all the docs at once, many of them will ignore admonitions and read draft docs with an unwarranted level of confidence. I think any table of Drafts should be separated from the table of "finished" documentation. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
