On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 03:12:12PM +0100, Axel Wernicke wrote: > to be honest I don't see the benefit of changing the kind of comments we do by now. The > information is almost the same, but due to that huge surrounding docbook structure it's very > hard to read in the source. Right now I'd prefer to stick to the way we are doing it today, > but may be you can convince me. The advantage is, that people are able to see what happened with the article they're looking at. If the document is out of date, because the last change was a year ago, we could probably encouraged some people to change that. Of course a very vague assumption, but not an impossible one. It is a very technical approach. The disadvantage about the current comments are, that our readers don't see the comments. Though we have to think about the releases. During releases we should skip to display this metadata. Greetings, -- Roman Joost www: http://www.romanofski.de email: romanofski@xxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpSDTdo9YhvK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gimp-docs mailing list Gimp-docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-docs
