18 Nov
2011
18 Nov
'11
12:17 a.m.
On 17 November 2011 11:58, Kristopher John Gamrat
<chaotickjg(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
Overruled. :-) The consensus here (which I agree with) is that no markup
languages are needed or desired. This documentation could potentially
grow to the size of a small book--can you seriously even imagine trying to
edit that for clarity, let along grammatical errors, without a word
processor? There is a right tool for the job, along with a bunch of
wrong, but workable, tools. Let's use the right one!
We will use the flat ODT format in GIT. I will work on getting automatic
builds both to "real" document formats (PDF, PostScript) and to HTML.
Help is welcome here; basically I just need the command line to pass to
LibreOffice to make it spit out such documents, especially on the HTML
end.
Tim
On Thursday 17 November 2011 11:50:12 am Calvin
Morrison wrote:
I'll respond to both here.
If users are sending in data and we are going to reformat it, it doesn't
matter if we use markdown or not.
Again if this is going to be very collaborative as Piki suggests, we might
as well employ the wiki we already have in place.
Calvin Morrison
Do you want a new inexperienced user writing your
help manual?
I was contributing to documentation over at Ark Linux within a month
after
I
started. It wasn't much, and most of it was adding details to existing
documentation, but I did contribute. That's what most inexperienced
users
will do if they do contribute: add in details. That's quite useful to
have:
since most of us have been doing awhile, it's hard for us to write from
a
newbie perspective, so we might leave out important details or not be
clear.
A new user who's reading that might get just enough detail to figure it
out
on their own and want to help improve the article.