the wiki FrontPage discussion rolls on

[Bradley Coleman]

On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 15:10 +0100, matthew.east.ubuntu at breathe.com
wrote:
> Bradley Coleman writes: 
> 
> > i hope i'm not top posting!  think i got it right this time.
> 
> lol, top posting is the practice of posting a response above the quoted text 
> rather that below it. It helps people follow emails, if you reply directly 
> underneath the relevant passage, like this ;) 
> 
> > matts original intention was to have the UserDocumentation imply
> > software only.  but of course, there is UserDocumentation in hardware as
> > well.  matt agree's that this is confusing.  how do you guys think we
> > should word this? 
> > 
> > i think we should do hardware user docs and software user docs.  or if
> > there are docs in there are not user docs, we might want to say hardware
> > docs and software docs to maintain generality. 
> > 
> > also, i think hardware and software should be right next to each other
> > on the top of the list.
> 
> I think we have a genuine issue here. There are two types of pages on the 
> wiki concerning hardware: 1. pages which list which types of hardware Ubuntu 
> is compatible with, and 2. pages which give users help on installing and 
> configuring various bits of hardware with Ubuntu. The latter fall clearly 
> within the concept of UserDocumentation as it currently stands, but there is 
> also a clear overlap with 1. It makes a lot of sense to have type 2. pages 
> linked from type 1. pages. 
> 
> As I see it, we have three choices:
> (a) attempt to draw the correct dividing line between the two types of page 
> I've described (IMO difficult if not impossible, and also undesirable)
> (b) merge all hardware related documentation into UserDocumentation
> (c) change the concept of UserDocumentation so that it excludes hardware 
> related documentation. 
> 
> My choice would probably be (b), but I don't really know. Also, you guys 
> have more experience than me with these things. Thoughts? 
> 
> M
> 


AM I TOP POSTING NOW!!  ;-)

MATT, honestly, i still prefer my solution, which i'll post again below.
think people want an answer to their problem, at the high level, its not
too important who wrote it.  we should let them know when they are
reading it if its official or user, but i don't think its necessary to
break it down that way in the hierarchy.

so, what does it mean to a user if its official ubuntu docs or user
docs?  i dont know, i'm guessing?  ubuntu docs might be better tested?
might be better in general?  you might not be able to edit them?  how
does it work?  why is the distinction so important?

here's my original idea ...

"think we should do hardware user docs and software user docs.  or if
there are docs in there are not user docs, we might want to say hardware
docs and software docs to maintain generality. 

also, i think hardware and software should be right next to each other 
on the top of the list."