does this seem funny to anyone else?

[r***@webulite.com]

lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)

Instead of getting OKed to create about the 265th group,
http://groups.drupal.org/WikiHelp
1) to promote the wiki content type
2) that can be edited with one click
3) and promote [[freelinking]] syntax

The recommendation seems to be;

1) join the Drupal doc team which is somewhat difficult to find and join,
and make changes that others will not be able to change unless they also
join the drupal doc team, which again, is not even know by most people.

2) so that I can make content type BOOK page that I do not want to promote
instead of the content type WIKI content type that I do

3) and use a syntax I don't want to promote, FILTERED HTML, instead of the
FREELINKING syntax I want to promote.

4) to build pages that anyone that views them will never be able to change
with one click (like wiki pages), and will probably never realize they
might also be able to change, if they can find how to join the doc team
themselves, and wanted to take the time to do so. So I am not building a
community where people EASILY change pages I have started

5) So that that I can build karma with Drupal

6) so that Drupal might consider changing their system to add allow wiki
content types on drupal.org some day

7) so that I can do what groups.drupal.org does today and I have already
created in working form.


Does this seem kind of funny to anyone else?

Cheers! Ricco

--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Shai Gluskin]

Ricco,

I've got to run get a train. Won't be able to answer you point by point.

Drupal.org is in major transition. There is a team of dedicated docs folks
who are working to reorganize the help and docs section. Making sure people
are able to find the docs team and learn how to join and its benefits is a
good thing and you can join forces to remind us of that, or I'll try to make
a note of it.

"We" is everyone "here.". There isn't a "them." If you try to make one, it
will make people more suspicious of you.

"Filtered Html" doesn't mean anything on its own. It works together with
other input formats.

You seem to be stressing "promoting." Stressing "collaborating" tends to be
more effective in the Drupal community.

You seem to have a very clear answer to how things should work. People have
been working on docs for a long time. Doesn't mean those folks have all the
answers. But there is a history to stuff, and there is a commitment to
change. But coming in and saying "I have all the answers" isn't particularly
helpful. But there isn't "one Drupal way" that needs to be enforced and all
outsiders coming in with better ideas will be rejected because they are
outsiders -- I'm not saying exactly that, but it's sounding like that and it
isn't true.

Seems like it takes at least two clicks to change any page, wiki or any
other way.

Why do you assume that Wiki style syntax is easier for most people. Actually
very few people are active editors of Wikipedia, I think under 10,000. I'm
not saying wiki syntax might not be ultimately included -- but your clarity
about its superiority can be doubted by reasonable people.

I'm off to the train.

Best,

Shai

Post by r***@webulite.com
lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)
Instead of getting OKed to create about the 265th group,
http://groups.drupal.org/WikiHelp
1) to promote the wiki content type
2) that can be edited with one click
3) and promote [[freelinking]] syntax
The recommendation seems to be;
1) join the Drupal doc team which is somewhat difficult to find and join,
and make changes that others will not be able to change unless they also
join the drupal doc team, which again, is not even know by most people.
2) so that I can make content type BOOK page that I do not want to promote
instead of the content type WIKI content type that I do
3) and use a syntax I don't want to promote, FILTERED HTML, instead of the
FREELINKING syntax I want to promote.
4) to build pages that anyone that views them will never be able to change
with one click (like wiki pages), and will probably never realize they
might also be able to change, if they can find how to join the doc team
themselves, and wanted to take the time to do so. So I am not building a
community where people EASILY change pages I have started
5) So that that I can build karma with Drupal
6) so that Drupal might consider changing their system to add allow wiki
content types on drupal.org some day
7) so that I can do what groups.drupal.org does today and I have already
created in working form.
Does this seem kind of funny to anyone else?
Cheers! Ricco
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Richard Hood]

My two cents:

1. "..join the Drupal doc team which is somewhat difficult to find and join"

Somehow I think having to join a team to work on docs is a good idea, and
would keep that. But if it is hard to do, that should be changed. For me
it was not hard to do (6 months ago or so), it just took a long time to get
added. Not a complaint, just something to look at.

One practical problem to allowing any registered user to change docs pages
is, I assume, that the only way to block them if necessary (and it will be)
is to block the user entirely instead of just removing a role. Is that
correct?

2. BOOK PAGE versus WIKI content type

Boy maybe I am just used to it, but I really like the Book Page system.

I can see how adding freelinking to Book Pages might be cool. Isn't that
just a matter of enabling the freelinking module on Drupal.org handbook
pages (and maybe wikitools module)? Or is that not as simple as it sounds
and/or Drupal.org wants to keep modules to a minimum for performance?

3. It seems that editing Book pages and Wiki pages both teaks 2 clicks.

---

Anyhow thanks Ricco for the discussion and the informative pages here:

http://groups.drupal.org/wikihelp

I didn't know much about Wiki functionality in Drupal until reading that.

Rick




-----Original Message-----
From: documentation-***@drupal.org
[mailto:documentation-***@drupal.org] On Behalf Of ***@webulite.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 3:36 AM
To: ***@drupal.org
Subject: [documentation] does this seem funny to anyone else?

lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)

Instead of getting OKed to create about the 265th group,
http://groups.drupal.org/WikiHelp
1) to promote the wiki content type
2) that can be edited with one click
3) and promote [[freelinking]] syntax

The recommendation seems to be;

1) join the Drupal doc team which is somewhat difficult to find and join,
and make changes that others will not be able to change unless they also
join the drupal doc team, which again, is not even know by most people.

2) so that I can make content type BOOK page that I do not want to promote
instead of the content type WIKI content type that I do

3) and use a syntax I don't want to promote, FILTERED HTML, instead of the
FREELINKING syntax I want to promote.

4) to build pages that anyone that views them will never be able to change
with one click (like wiki pages), and will probably never realize they
might also be able to change, if they can find how to join the doc team
themselves, and wanted to take the time to do so. So I am not building a
community where people EASILY change pages I have started

5) So that that I can build karma with Drupal

6) so that Drupal might consider changing their system to add allow wiki
content types on drupal.org some day

7) so that I can do what groups.drupal.org does today and I have already
created in working form.


Does this seem kind of funny to anyone else?

Cheers! Ricco

--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Bill Fitzgerald]

Hello, Ricco,

I'm glad to see you taking an interest in improving the docs -- I've
seen your posts on g.d.o regarding wikis, etc.

Like another responder, I'm responding quickly here, but a couple things
stand out:

First, good info on joining the docs team is two clicks away on *any*
page on Drupal.org -- click the "Contribute" tab, and then the
documentation link (which appears on the first screen) -- this gets you
to: http://drupal.org/contribute/documentation

Second, information about joining the docs team can easily be found
here:
http://www.google.com/search?&q=join+documentation+team+site:drupal.org

Third, there is a long history/conversation regarding docs, wiki format,
wiki syntax, etc: see
http://www.google.com/search?&q=wiki+style+documentation+pages+site:drupal.org
for an overview -- these pages might provide some helpful context.

Fourth, in my experience bringing a variety of sites live within
educational contexts (and here I'm specifically referring to Drupal,
Moodle, and Mediawiki sites), users frequently expressed frustration
with wiki syntax. They wanted a wysiwyg, and didn't really care about
being able to create pages by linking to an empty page. PBWiki came to a
similar conclusion, and they experienced a boom of new membership when
they added a text editor to their application.

I'm glad to see you getting interested and involved, and welcome to the
work of continuing to improve the docs.

Cheers,

Bill

Post by r***@webulite.com
lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)
Instead of getting OKed to create about the 265th group,
http://groups.drupal.org/WikiHelp
1) to promote the wiki content type
2) that can be edited with one click
3) and promote [[freelinking]] syntax
The recommendation seems to be;
1) join the Drupal doc team which is somewhat difficult to find and join,
and make changes that others will not be able to change unless they also
join the drupal doc team, which again, is not even know by most people.
2) so that I can make content type BOOK page that I do not want to promote
instead of the content type WIKI content type that I do
3) and use a syntax I don't want to promote, FILTERED HTML, instead of the
FREELINKING syntax I want to promote.
4) to build pages that anyone that views them will never be able to change
with one click (like wiki pages), and will probably never realize they
might also be able to change, if they can find how to join the doc team
themselves, and wanted to take the time to do so. So I am not building a
community where people EASILY change pages I have started
5) So that that I can build karma with Drupal
6) so that Drupal might consider changing their system to add allow wiki
content types on drupal.org some day
7) so that I can do what groups.drupal.org does today and I have already
created in working form.
Does this seem kind of funny to anyone else?
Cheers! Ricco
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Walter GR]

Post by r***@webulite.com
lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)
<snip>
Cheers! Ricco

In June of last year, I suggested that doing documentation-as-a-wiki
might be a good idea.

I created one, much to others' chagrin. They suggested I join the
documentation team. I decided to pursue that route.

As I had a wiki at my disposal, I decided to use it for proposing some
changes to the documentation. I spent *hours* making improvements, and
then posted a link requesting feedback:

http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/2007-June/005657.html

Nobody gave any feedback. I don't even know if anyone looked at my
proposed changes.

Best of luck, Ricco.

[Steve Dondley]

Walter,

This proves that following the "Build it and they will come" is a
gamble. You need buy-in and agreement from others most of the time.

To get buy-in, you need karma. To get karma, you need to contribute.
To contribute, you need to work within the system as it is.

Call it politics or whatever, but that is how humans haved tended to
operate for the last 3 million years. I don't think it's likely to
change anytime soon.

That is why my advice to ricco is to not ask the community to bend to
his needs but to have him bend to the community's needs. If the
community jumped at every request from every person, no matter how
worth, nothing would get done. You need to first earn the reputation
to be able to persuade others that your way is superior.

Post by Walter GR

Post by r***@webulite.com
lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)
<snip>
Cheers! Ricco

In June of last year, I suggested that doing documentation-as-a-wiki
might be a good idea.
I created one, much to others' chagrin. They suggested I join the
documentation team. I decided to pursue that route.
As I had a wiki at my disposal, I decided to use it for proposing some
changes to the documentation. I spent *hours* making improvements, and
http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/2007-June/005657.html
Nobody gave any feedback. I don't even know if anyone looked at my
proposed changes.
Best of luck, Ricco.
--
The Online Slang Dictionary - Now with a thesaurus!
http://onlineslangdictionary.com/
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Walter GR]

Post by Steve Dondley
This proves that following the "Build it and they will come" is a
gamble. You need buy-in and agreement from others most of the time.

Very true.

Post by Steve Dondley
To get buy-in, you need karma. To get karma, you need to contribute.
To contribute, you need to work within the system as it is.

I tried to get karma. I tried to contribute. I made *precisely* the
changes I suggested, and then asked for feedback on them.

I asked people to simply navigate to another website where I
demonstrated the changes.

Is that a huge departure from the system as-is?

Meanwhile, I don't see Drupal 6 documentation on
http://drupal.org/getting-started. How's the system working out?

Post by Steve Dondley
That is why my advice to ricco is to not ask the community to bend to
his needs but to have him bend to the community's needs.

Walter

[Bill Fitzgerald]

Hello, all,

I tried to get karma. I tried to contribute. I made *precisely* the
changes I suggested, and then asked for feedback on them.
I asked people to simply navigate to another website where I
demonstrated the changes.

Why not make your edits directly on d.o? We have revisions, and can roll
back/edit as needed.

Is that a huge departure from the system as-is?
Meanwhile, I don't see Drupal 6 documentation on
http://drupal.org/getting-started. How's the system working out?

Thanks for pointing that out.

http://drupal.org/node/241825 -- this is an introductory page, with
links to the videocasts. Edit away!

Also, someone with rights to the D5 page should adjust the weight, so
that the order is D6, D5, D4.7 --

Cheers,

Bill

[Joshua Brauer]

I'd thought about this off and on over the years. Then recently Larry
Garfield wrote a piece that encapsulated the situation brilliantly
pointing out that Drupal.org effectively *has* a wiki:

http://www.garfieldtech.com/drupal-org-wiki

As Larry suggests in his article, for me the idea of adding non-HTML
markup to the documentation of a system that is all about building and
serving HTML is counter-productive. Users with the desire need only
ask and they can have edit rights on content and they need to know
very rudimentary HTML. If someone doesn't know the most basic of HTML
perhaps a few hours spent learning it would be a worthwhile pre-
requisite to contributing to the documentation of a system that is all
about HTML.

Josh

---------------------------
Joshua Brauer

Brauer Ranch Ltd. Co.
http://BrauerRanch.com

Making the world better through Drupal.

Post by Steve Dondley
Walter,
This proves that following the "Build it and they will come" is a
gamble. You need buy-in and agreement from others most of the time.
To get buy-in, you need karma. To get karma, you need to contribute.
To contribute, you need to work within the system as it is.
Call it politics or whatever, but that is how humans haved tended to
operate for the last 3 million years. I don't think it's likely to
change anytime soon.
That is why my advice to ricco is to not ask the community to bend to
his needs but to have him bend to the community's needs. If the
community jumped at every request from every person, no matter how
worth, nothing would get done. You need to first earn the reputation
to be able to persuade others that your way is superior.

Post by Walter GR

Post by r***@webulite.com
lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)
<snip>
Cheers! Ricco

In June of last year, I suggested that doing documentation-as-a-wiki
might be a good idea.
I created one, much to others' chagrin. They suggested I join the
documentation team. I decided to pursue that route.
As I had a wiki at my disposal, I decided to use it for proposing some
changes to the documentation. I spent *hours* making improvements, and
http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/2007-June/005657.html
Nobody gave any feedback. I don't even know if anyone looked at my
proposed changes.
Best of luck, Ricco.
--
The Online Slang Dictionary - Now with a thesaurus!
http://onlineslangdictionary.com/
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

--
Prometheus Labor Communications, Inc.
http://prometheuslabor.com
413-572-1300
Communicate or Die: American Labor Unions and the Internet
http://communicateordie.com
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Steve Dondley]

Garfied's post prompts me to put in my two cents on the wiki phenom:
really overrated.

Everyone points to the success of Wikipedia. That's great. But that's
one project. And I think it's wrong to attribute it's success to the
technology behind it. In fact, I think it succeeded despite the
underlying technology (learning the arcane markup is quite maddening
in my opinion).

Maybe I don't get out into the wilds of the web enough, but I've seen
far more disorganized, unreadable disasters with wiki then I have
successful projects.

Post by Joshua Brauer
I'd thought about this off and on over the years. Then recently Larry
Garfield wrote a piece that encapsulated the situation brilliantly pointing
http://www.garfieldtech.com/drupal-org-wiki
As Larry suggests in his article, for me the idea of adding non-HTML markup
to the documentation of a system that is all about building and serving HTML
is counter-productive. Users with the desire need only ask and they can have
edit rights on content and they need to know very rudimentary HTML. If
someone doesn't know the most basic of HTML perhaps a few hours spent
learning it would be a worthwhile pre-requisite to contributing to the
documentation of a system that is all about HTML.
Josh
---------------------------
Joshua Brauer
Brauer Ranch Ltd. Co.
http://BrauerRanch.com
Making the world better through Drupal.

Post by Steve Dondley
Walter,
This proves that following the "Build it and they will come" is a
gamble. You need buy-in and agreement from others most of the time.
To get buy-in, you need karma. To get karma, you need to contribute.
To contribute, you need to work within the system as it is.
Call it politics or whatever, but that is how humans haved tended to
operate for the last 3 million years. I don't think it's likely to
change anytime soon.
That is why my advice to ricco is to not ask the community to bend to
his needs but to have him bend to the community's needs. If the
community jumped at every request from every person, no matter how
worth, nothing would get done. You need to first earn the reputation
to be able to persuade others that your way is superior.

Post by Walter GR

Post by r***@webulite.com
lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)
<snip>
Cheers! Ricco

In June of last year, I suggested that doing documentation-as-a-wiki
might be a good idea.
I created one, much to others' chagrin. They suggested I join the
documentation team. I decided to pursue that route.
As I had a wiki at my disposal, I decided to use it for proposing some
changes to the documentation. I spent *hours* making improvements, and
http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/2007-June/005657.html
Nobody gave any feedback. I don't even know if anyone looked at my
proposed changes.
Best of luck, Ricco.
--
The Online Slang Dictionary - Now with a thesaurus!
http://onlineslangdictionary.com/
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

--
Prometheus Labor Communications, Inc.
http://prometheuslabor.com
413-572-1300
Communicate or Die: American Labor Unions and the Internet
http://communicateordie.com
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Walter GR]

Post by Steve Dondley
Maybe I don't get out into the wilds of the web enough, but I've seen
far more disorganized, unreadable disasters with wiki then I have
successful projects.

Documentation should be like a book, not a wiki in the traditional
sense. That's why there's http://en.wikibooks.org/ for example.

Yes: when used _improperly_, wikis are absolutely terrible for
documentation.

That's why I set up my wiki correctly wiki when requesting feedback on
my documentation changes.

Walter

[Alan Palazzolo]

First post to documentation list.

I think this is a very valid point. I don't like learning new markup.
It can or cannot make things easier.

Still, I really hope this discussion is not about syntax. It should be
about structure, accountability, and empowering.

People that have been here awhile have to realize that things are not
perfect and change needs to happen. New people need to realize that
change cannot happen overnight. There needs to be compromise.
Creditability and good ideas are not the same. Please do not fork the
documentation.

My personal thoughts: I think it should be more like wiki, but with some
well structured navigation.

--
Alan

Post by Joshua Brauer
I'd thought about this off and on over the years. Then recently Larry
Garfield wrote a piece that encapsulated the situation brilliantly
http://www.garfieldtech.com/drupal-org-wiki
As Larry suggests in his article, for me the idea of adding non-HTML
markup to the documentation of a system that is all about building and
serving HTML is counter-productive. Users with the desire need only ask
and they can have edit rights on content and they need to know very
rudimentary HTML. If someone doesn't know the most basic of HTML perhaps
a few hours spent learning it would be a worthwhile pre-requisite to
contributing to the documentation of a system that is all about HTML.
Josh
---------------------------
Joshua Brauer
Brauer Ranch Ltd. Co.
http://BrauerRanch.com
Making the world better through Drupal.

Post by Steve Dondley
Walter,
This proves that following the "Build it and they will come" is a
gamble. You need buy-in and agreement from others most of the time.
To get buy-in, you need karma. To get karma, you need to contribute.
To contribute, you need to work within the system as it is.
Call it politics or whatever, but that is how humans haved tended to
operate for the last 3 million years. I don't think it's likely to
change anytime soon.
That is why my advice to ricco is to not ask the community to bend to
his needs but to have him bend to the community's needs. If the
community jumped at every request from every person, no matter how
worth, nothing would get done. You need to first earn the reputation
to be able to persuade others that your way is superior.

Post by Walter GR

Post by r***@webulite.com
lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)
<snip>
Cheers! Ricco

In June of last year, I suggested that doing documentation-as-a-wiki
might be a good idea.
I created one, much to others' chagrin. They suggested I join the
documentation team. I decided to pursue that route.
As I had a wiki at my disposal, I decided to use it for proposing some
changes to the documentation. I spent *hours* making improvements, and
http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/2007-June/005657.html
Nobody gave any feedback. I don't even know if anyone looked at my
proposed changes.
Best of luck, Ricco.
--
The Online Slang Dictionary - Now with a thesaurus!
http://onlineslangdictionary.com/
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

--
Prometheus Labor Communications, Inc.
http://prometheuslabor.com
413-572-1300
Communicate or Die: American Labor Unions and the Internet
http://communicateordie.com
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Steve Dondley]

Right. No need to change everything because of a few shortcomings. The
task has to be list the shortcomings and find the person who has the
technical ability/authority to make the actual improvements.

Post by Alan Palazzolo
First post to documentation list.
I think this is a very valid point. I don't like learning new markup.
It can or cannot make things easier.
Still, I really hope this discussion is not about syntax. It should be
about structure, accountability, and empowering.
People that have been here awhile have to realize that things are not
perfect and change needs to happen. New people need to realize that
change cannot happen overnight. There needs to be compromise.
Creditability and good ideas are not the same. Please do not fork the
documentation.
My personal thoughts: I think it should be more like wiki, but with some
well structured navigation.
--
Alan

Post by Joshua Brauer
I'd thought about this off and on over the years. Then recently Larry
Garfield wrote a piece that encapsulated the situation brilliantly
http://www.garfieldtech.com/drupal-org-wiki
As Larry suggests in his article, for me the idea of adding non-HTML
markup to the documentation of a system that is all about building and
serving HTML is counter-productive. Users with the desire need only ask
and they can have edit rights on content and they need to know very
rudimentary HTML. If someone doesn't know the most basic of HTML perhaps
a few hours spent learning it would be a worthwhile pre-requisite to
contributing to the documentation of a system that is all about HTML.
Josh
---------------------------
Joshua Brauer
Brauer Ranch Ltd. Co.
http://BrauerRanch.com
Making the world better through Drupal.

Post by Steve Dondley
Walter,
This proves that following the "Build it and they will come" is a
gamble. You need buy-in and agreement from others most of the time.
To get buy-in, you need karma. To get karma, you need to contribute.
To contribute, you need to work within the system as it is.
Call it politics or whatever, but that is how humans haved tended to
operate for the last 3 million years. I don't think it's likely to
change anytime soon.
That is why my advice to ricco is to not ask the community to bend to
his needs but to have him bend to the community's needs. If the
community jumped at every request from every person, no matter how
worth, nothing would get done. You need to first earn the reputation
to be able to persuade others that your way is superior.

Post by Walter GR

Post by r***@webulite.com
lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)
<snip>
Cheers! Ricco

In June of last year, I suggested that doing documentation-as-a-wiki
might be a good idea.
I created one, much to others' chagrin. They suggested I join the
documentation team. I decided to pursue that route.
As I had a wiki at my disposal, I decided to use it for proposing some
changes to the documentation. I spent *hours* making improvements, and
http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/2007-June/005657.html
Nobody gave any feedback. I don't even know if anyone looked at my
proposed changes.
Best of luck, Ricco.
--
The Online Slang Dictionary - Now with a thesaurus!
http://onlineslangdictionary.com/
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

--
Prometheus Labor Communications, Inc.
http://prometheuslabor.com
413-572-1300
Communicate or Die: American Labor Unions and the Internet
http://communicateordie.com
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Marjorie Roswell]

I'm curious: How did you do the cool folders and pages here:
http://waltergr.com/drupalbook/010_about_drupal_1/index

Post by Walter GR

Post by r***@webulite.com
lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)
<snip>
Cheers! Ricco

In June of last year, I suggested that doing documentation-as-a-wiki
might be a good idea.
I created one, much to others' chagrin. They suggested I join the
documentation team. I decided to pursue that route.
As I had a wiki at my disposal, I decided to use it for proposing some
changes to the documentation. I spent *hours* making improvements, and
http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/2007-June/005657.html
Nobody gave any feedback. I don't even know if anyone looked at my
proposed changes.
Best of luck, Ricco.
--
The Online Slang Dictionary - Now with a thesaurus!
http://onlineslangdictionary.com/
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Walter GR]

Post by Marjorie Roswell
http://waltergr.com/drupalbook/010_about_drupal_1/index

DokuWiki is the wiki package I'm using... By default it supports
book-like (i.e. hierarchical) organization of pages.

The fancy table-of-contents display is generated by a plugin called
IndexMenu.

Walter

[Peter Wolanin]

Ricco,

We very much welcome your help on the docs team, so I hope you will
join and contribute.

As a g.d.o moderator - a group aimed at improving (generally)
wiki-type functionality in Drupal (e.g. various content filters) and
maybe making a "Wiki" distribution would be likely to get approved.

There is already a system for the drupal.org docs, and many different
ideas about how it might be improved. A new g.d.o group would not be
appropriate (imho) if it's focused on this. This list and/or the
appropriate issue queues on drupal.org would be the places to have
those discussions.

Also, the hurdle for installing new modules on drupal.org is very high
(due to security review and much greater infrastructure concerns)
compared to g.d.o, so as a point of information, a bunch of additional
modules are not going to be deployed on d.o on any short time scale.

-Peter

--Original Message-----
From: documentation-***@drupal.org
[mailto:documentation-***@drupal.org] On Behalf Of ***@webulite.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 3:36 AM
To: ***@drupal.org
Subject: [documentation] does this seem funny to anyone else?

lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)

Instead of getting OKed to create about the 265th group,
http://groups.drupal.org/WikiHelp
1) to promote the wiki content type
2) that can be edited with one click
3) and promote [[freelinking]] syntax

The recommendation seems to be;

1) join the Drupal doc team which is somewhat difficult to find and join,
and make changes that others will not be able to change unless they also
join the drupal doc team, which again, is not even know by most people.

2) so that I can make content type BOOK page that I do not want to promote
instead of the content type WIKI content type that I do

3) and use a syntax I don't want to promote, FILTERED HTML, instead of the
FREELINKING syntax I want to promote.

4) to build pages that anyone that views them will never be able to change
with one click (like wiki pages), and will probably never realize they
might also be able to change, if they can find how to join the doc team
themselves, and wanted to take the time to do so. So I am not building a
community where people EASILY change pages I have started

5) So that that I can build karma with Drupal

6) so that Drupal might consider changing their system to add allow wiki
content types on drupal.org some day

7) so that I can do what groups.drupal.org does today and I have already
created in working form.


Does this seem kind of funny to anyone else?

Cheers! Ricco
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Peter Wolanin]

Ah, looking further I see that indeed the existing wiki group is
focused on the functional aspects, and that Riccio has already been
drafting a number of "help" pages.

Here's my suggestion - rename the group something like "documentation
drafts" and post on each page a link to the drupal.org page which you
are interested in revising. I can see value in a group that serves as
a working space for revising docs (for those who really prefer wiki
markup and open editing) with the proviso that the end goal is to post
the updated content back to drupal.org. Note that this last step
would probably involve copying the page source (i.e html markup).

A group providing an entire alternate set of documents seems counter-productive.

For example:

http://groups.drupal.org/node/10259

could be a draft revision of:

http://drupal.org/handbook/modules/og

-Peter
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Larry Garfield]

Before pushing for "a wiki" on drupal.org, please read:

http://www.garfieldtech.com/drupal-org-wiki

This is a very old issue.

Post by r***@webulite.com
lol... this kind of cracks me up. In a frustrating kind of way :)
Instead of getting OKed to create about the 265th group,
http://groups.drupal.org/WikiHelp
1) to promote the wiki content type
2) that can be edited with one click
3) and promote [[freelinking]] syntax
The recommendation seems to be;
1) join the Drupal doc team which is somewhat difficult to find and join,
and make changes that others will not be able to change unless they also
join the drupal doc team, which again, is not even know by most people.
2) so that I can make content type BOOK page that I do not want to promote
instead of the content type WIKI content type that I do
3) and use a syntax I don't want to promote, FILTERED HTML, instead of the
FREELINKING syntax I want to promote.
4) to build pages that anyone that views them will never be able to change
with one click (like wiki pages), and will probably never realize they
might also be able to change, if they can find how to join the doc team
themselves, and wanted to take the time to do so. So I am not building a
community where people EASILY change pages I have started
5) So that that I can build karma with Drupal
6) so that Drupal might consider changing their system to add allow wiki
content types on drupal.org some day
7) so that I can do what groups.drupal.org does today and I have already
created in working form.
Does this seem kind of funny to anyone else?
Cheers! Ricco
--
Pending work: http://drupal.org/project/issues/documentation/
List archives: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/

[Larry Garfield]

OK, and I need to read the rest of the thread before replying and seeing that
not one but two other people already linked there. Sorry! :-)

Post by Joshua Brauer
http://www.garfieldtech.com/drupal-org-wiki
This is a very old issue.