about Fundamental issues

[James Richard Tyrer]

Carlos Leonhard Woelz wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 11:19:20 -0300, "Henrique Pinto"
> <henrique.pinto at kdemail.net> said:
> 
>>>I wouldn't have time to *join* any documentation team, and learn all the
>>>tools, but I would probably, in my spare moments, be able to go along and
>>>add a few words here and there if they're out of date. I might also be able
>>>to go and contribute to the en_GB i18n.
>>>
>>>The only question that would arise is: would the documentation teams be
>>>able to effectively police it, and spot incorrect or malicious changes?
>>>
>>>What are people's thoughts?
>>
>>I like your idea. What about asking on the kde-doc-english mailinglist?
>>https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-quality
> 
> 
> This idea is good, but I don't think it is feasible.
> 
> The docs.kde.org already offer a view of the current KDE docs (CVS or 3.2
> branch). As someone who maintains identical wiki and cvs versions of
> documents, in a less complex format (html x docbook), I can tell you it
> would be a lot of work to maintain the wiki for all KDE docs.
> 
> It would require writing tools for automatic docbook => wiki and wiki =>
> docbook. Manual conversion takes to much work. Even with this tool, it
> would require a lot of hand ajustment, unfortunately.
> 
> for people who want to help but do not want to learn docbook, the doc
> team recomends writing plain text. The doc team would then handle the
> conversion.
> 
> I plan to write a "step by step guide for writing docs", using Quanta as
> the main writing tool. Maybe this can also help.

OK, is there some way to have the current docs available (the current docs 
are supposed to be available on the web already) so that it couldn't be 
changed but so that it was possible to mark it up (post comments) and let 
the doc people deal with actual changes?

--
JRT