On Jan 6, 2009, at 3:05 PM, susan_lists@xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hopefully the CMS solution can allow a compromise.
I can work with straight XML and for most docs that is a good plan.
I think the CMS would work out very well. As for staying with/leaving
the wiki, I'm kinda in the middle, but I'm still leaning towards
leaving it. You make some good points, but I'm not sure if the small
advantages we get can weigh up against the advantages of editing right
in XML.
I think that for a UG though, we can get a lot more feedback if it
stays in a wiki.
Remember that the people using the UG are less likely to be
experienced or even interested in CLI but many already know how to
edit in a wiki. We need the people who use the document to be
willing to fix the document. Even if they never contribute to other
documents.
The issue here is that the UG is (as it stands, at least) geared
toward new users who really haven't used Linux much if at all before.
They probably - with some exceptions - aren't members of the open
source community, and probably don't have an FAS account. And without
an FAS account, you can't edit the wiki. =)
Although we've been running this in a wiki, I don't think we've
actually ever made it work like the traditional wiki. We don't really
point new Fedora users to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_Guide,
because that's usually where we work on it; we publish it to XML. I'm
fairly confident when I say that virtually nobody except us edits the
User Guide, with exceptions few and far between.
- Matthew
--
fedora-docs-list mailing list
fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
