On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 07:48:23PM +0100, Axel Wernicke wrote: > >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 If the document is out of date, because the 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. > That would of course work only if the revision entries were language > dependant. Otherwise If someone translates content from the GIMP stone > age the document seems updated recently to *ALL* readers, but was > translated to a new language only :( Actually, I never thought about making this information language dependant. The current comments aren't language dependent, so this metadata shouldn't be as well. It is just developer information. The docs hosted on http://docs.gimp.org are developer snapshots, so I thought that displaying this information for the developer snapshots would be a nice to have feature for readers and esp. probably upcoming writers or proof readers. > I think most of the content is independent of time anyway. It simply doesn't matter if a > tutorial was written yesterday or two years ago. Where time (GIMP releases) matter of course > is everything that is related to the reference part of the manual. Well, a tutorial written for GIMP 1.2 would be more or less unusable nowadays. Of course, if you really want to understand that specific feature, you're free to find the necessary triggers. But I think, that every aspect of the manual is dependent on the GIMP version and therefore dependent on time. > May be we should hurry up to get up to date for the 2.2 release (I guess we are not that far > away from that) and then freeze and release it as gimp-help 1.0. With this we could split up > the changelog (which is btw. pretty large already now) and have a sweet start for bringing the > relevant topics up to gimp 2.4 then. > > So if we decide to switch to revhistory elements we need to > - make sure we can hide it from release html / pdf versions That wouldn't be the tricky part IMHO. Just using a customized stylesheet of the current stylesheets which suppresses the info elements should do the trick. > - make it lang dependent (how is this supposed to work with cvs??) If we really want to do that, it would work like the current profiling works. But I don't think we should make it language dependant, just for the sake of completeness. It's just not worth it IMO. > - define in which granularity it should be done (today we do it by file, but not sect1 sect2 > specific) Good point - haven't thought about that. > - introduce it step by step Yep or maybe after a 1.0 release? Hm.. step by step seems to be better ... Greetings, -- Roman Joost www: http://www.romanofski.de email: romanofski@xxxxxxxx
Attachment:
pgpfyqcqnxuLR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gimp-docs mailing list Gimp-docs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-docs
