[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
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
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
(http://www.cocoadev.com). 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
http://www.cocoadev.com/index.pl?NSObject , or, for that matter
http://www.cocoadev.com/index.pl?GNUstep . It can be effective for
documentation, though, as long as it's clear that's what the site is
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.
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
Re: Documentation, Manuel Guesdon, 2002/09/25