[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Documentation

From: Adam Atlas
Subject: Re: Documentation
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 15:38:09 -0400

On Monday, September 23, 2002, at 08:53  PM, Alexander Malmberg wrote:

Sounds a bit chaotic, but it might work in the early stages :). In time,
we might want to have stricter control over what goes in the 'real'
documentation, although a way of adding comments to pages you can't
modify would still be useful. Distribution in different formats,
off-line viewing, and printing are also potential issues. I'm afraid I
don't know that much about Wikis, but the concept sounds very
interesting. Is there one that can handle all this?

It doesn't have to be chaotic. If you didn't, take a look at Cocoadev ( That's more of a discussion and community site than a documentation site: the most they have in terms of documentation is usually a link to Apple's page about it. To see an example of how Cocoadev works, try looking at , or, for that matter . It can be effective for documentation, though, as long as it's clear that's what the site is about.

Or look at Wikipedia, probably the best proof that Wiki works. It's an effort to write an encyclopedia from scratch using Wiki, completely by volunteer contributors, and so far, it's been very successful.

As I said, most implementations of Wiki store complete revision history. If we were to set up a Wiki, it could be up-to-the-minute contributed and official documentation, and then the GNUstep developers could decide what goes into the official documentation.


Adam Atlas

Where a calculator on the ENIAC is equipped with 18,000 vacuum tubes and weighs 30 tons, computers in the future may have only 1,000 vacuum tubes and weigh only 1.5 tons. - Popular Mechanics, 1949

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]