You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org> on 2003/02/19 08:45:49 UTC
xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 03:11:44PM +1100, David Crossley wrote:
> Diana Shannon wrote:
...
> > I find it a PITA to have to update my HEAD **and** release cvs
> > branches for simple document updates. It's frustrating to have
> > doc updates dependencies on a HEAD branch that doesn't reliably
> > build. I think a separate CVS branch/block/module would be a
> > definite improvement of the existing situation, but I still think
> > Wiki should remain the way a majority of people contribute/patch
> > docs. In fact, I think we should consider moving all existing
> > Cocoon docs straight to Wiki, so people can patch them there.
> > I proposed it early, when Cocoon's Wiki started, but I backed
> > off, given the fact it looked like a way to run around Forrest --
> > which I didn't want to do. However, now with Wiki's increasing
> > integration to Forrest (and Steven's ideas of converting wiki
> > docs via site.xml or similar), it makes increasing sense to me.
>
> Will people be able to do both ways - traditional patch/create
> xdocs in cvs, or via the Wiki?
With Chaperon integration, the next version of Forrest should be able to
handle cwiki and xdoc formats equally well.
> Online editing might be okay for people in well-connected countries.
> However, for the rest of us, working online via dial-up modem through a
> clumsy web interface is not productive.
Well, with the wiki, you click 'edit', make your change, click 'save',
and that's it.
With CVS, you have to:
- Download a CVS client
- Install it, Learn how to use it, work out the pserver string, bang
your head against CVS_RSH, eventually get it right.
- For many users, discover for the first time that a firewall blocks
port 2401, and you've wasted your time.
- Wait n hours for 34M of Cocoon to download
- find the xdoc you want to edit, build docs, wait, rinse, repeat
- Search the web for "how to create a patch". Finally figure out 'cvs
diff -u'.
- Create a bugzilla account, create a doc enhancement request.
And that's your afternoon, if not your whole day, down the drain.
Moving to Forrest will make the edit turnaround cycle faster, at the
expense of an extra 10mb download.
So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki. It seems the
best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual wiki/xdoc
system would cause.
--Jeff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Of course, slide + Wyona + etc is the final goal
Please let's not jump to conclusions ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Of course, slide + Wyona + etc is the final goal
Please let's not jump to conclusions ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)
Posted by Diana Shannon <sh...@apache.org>.
On Wednesday, February 19, 2003, at 12:05 PM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> I have introduced ihtml and cwiki for the sole reason to make doc
> editing much easier. Imagine that our doccers use Webdav on Subversion
> to commit doc changes, in html or wiki format. Plain easy, and
> subversion gives us revisions.
I need time to check this approach out in greater detail over the
weekend. I'll report back with impressions.
Thanks to everyone for the great input on this thread!
Diana
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Jeff Turner wrote, On 19/02/2003 15.49:
...
> So there's a half-formed plan over in Forrest-land to migrate to XHTML 2
> as an intermediate format, and make it one of the frontend formats too:
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=104351979527689&w=2
Then why not use html (ihtml), there are loads of editors.
I have introduced ihtml and cwiki for the sole reason to make doc
editing much easier. Imagine that our doccers use Webdav on Subversion
to commit doc changes, in html or wiki format. Plain easy, and
subversion gives us revisions.
Add to that SSL so we don't need to give unix accounts to everyone that
collaborates on our CVS, and that the wiki files can be edited by anyone
using subwiki, and you have a *usable* the poor man's CMS.
Of course, slide + Wyona + etc is the final goal, but in the meantime
this could be a step in that direction.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Jeff Turner wrote, On 19/02/2003 15.49:
...
> So there's a half-formed plan over in Forrest-land to migrate to XHTML 2
> as an intermediate format, and make it one of the frontend formats too:
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=104351979527689&w=2
Then why not use html (ihtml), there are loads of editors.
I have introduced ihtml and cwiki for the sole reason to make doc
editing much easier. Imagine that our doccers use Webdav on Subversion
to commit doc changes, in html or wiki format. Plain easy, and
subversion gives us revisions.
Add to that SSL so we don't need to give unix accounts to everyone that
collaborates on our CVS, and that the wiki files can be edited by anyone
using subwiki, and you have a *usable* the poor man's CMS.
Of course, slide + Wyona + etc is the final goal, but in the meantime
this could be a step in that direction.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)
Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 01:39:56PM +0000, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> "Jeff Turner" <je...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki. It seems the
> > best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual wiki/xdoc
> > system would cause.
>
> I disagree on that. IMO the "Wiki" syntax doesn't have the capability to
> contextualize the information contained in the document (how can we tell
> that a "screenshot" is different from a "configuration file snippet?" - in
> "Wiki" it's all a big <PRE>...</PRE> whatever).
In doc-v11 we'd have to abuse <code> to do that. The XML format is so
limited that this kind of abuse becomes necessary. We could add
<screenshot> and <configuration> tags, but where does the tag-adding
process end?
Its sad, but right now, CSS-happy XHTML is often more semantically rich
than doc-v11 XML documentation. We could use:
<div style="configuration">
</div>
Which is a DTD-friendly equivalent of <configuration>.
So there's a half-formed plan over in Forrest-land to migrate to XHTML 2
as an intermediate format, and make it one of the frontend formats too:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=104351979527689&w=2
--Jeff
> Otherwise, what's the point of using XML anyway. I could use FrontPage and
> web folders and get done with it...
>
> Pier
>
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)
Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 01:39:56PM +0000, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> "Jeff Turner" <je...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki. It seems the
> > best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual wiki/xdoc
> > system would cause.
>
> I disagree on that. IMO the "Wiki" syntax doesn't have the capability to
> contextualize the information contained in the document (how can we tell
> that a "screenshot" is different from a "configuration file snippet?" - in
> "Wiki" it's all a big <PRE>...</PRE> whatever).
In doc-v11 we'd have to abuse <code> to do that. The XML format is so
limited that this kind of abuse becomes necessary. We could add
<screenshot> and <configuration> tags, but where does the tag-adding
process end?
Its sad, but right now, CSS-happy XHTML is often more semantically rich
than doc-v11 XML documentation. We could use:
<div style="configuration">
</div>
Which is a DTD-friendly equivalent of <configuration>.
So there's a half-formed plan over in Forrest-land to migrate to XHTML 2
as an intermediate format, and make it one of the frontend formats too:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=forrest-dev&m=104351979527689&w=2
--Jeff
> Otherwise, what's the point of using XML anyway. I could use FrontPage and
> web folders and get done with it...
>
> Pier
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by SAXESS - Hussayn Dabbous <da...@saxess.com>.
you may look at the CocoonCompetenceCenter for Metadata issues.
There we alkready started doing something into this direction.
Maybe this helps as contribution:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-users&m=104369287706014&w=2
http://wiki.cocoondev.org/Wiki.jsp?page=BeginnerPageTemplate
It would be great, if the Wiki could support the BeginnerPageTemplate
or something equivalent and just add it into a freshly created
Wiki-Page ?
Then the formal requirements could be fullfilled with less pain.
Or the other idea is to add a module to the Wiki, that handles
metadata (an idea which Bertrand/Steve brought in some time ago)
regards, Hussayn
Jeff Turner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 09:01:26AM +0100, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
>>Le Mercredi, 19 fév 2003, à 08:45 Europe/Zurich, Jeff Turner a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>...So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki. It seems
>>>the
>>>best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual
>>>wiki/xdoc
>>>system would cause.
>>
>>I tend to agree but OTOH there must be some way for users to find out
>>about the reliability of a document.
>>
>>Currently, I think the xdocs are viewed are "official" whereas the wiki
>>is more like "melting pot" - the difference is easy, even though the
>>good quality of many wiki docs makes it more blurred in practice.
>>
>>So I think, if in the future all docs are done on a wiki, some form of
>>metadata/review system is required so that the state and validity of a
>>particular document is clearly visible.
>
>
> Agreed. Perhaps just a section at the top of each page for "Reviewed by
> <author> at <date>" declarations?
>
> Another bit of important metadata is the Cocoon version (2.0.x or 2.1)
> that the doc applies to.
>
> --Jeff
>
>
>>-Bertrand
>>
>>
>
--
Dr. Hussayn Dabbous
SAXESS Software Design GmbH
Neuenhöfer Allee 125
50935 Köln
Telefon: +49-221-56011-0
Fax: +49-221-56011-20
E-Mail: dabbous@saxess.com
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by SAXESS - Hussayn Dabbous <da...@saxess.com>.
Just another proposal:
If the docs really move toward a Wiki, i would highly appreciate,
if we set up authentification for the editors. This may be
contrary to the original Wiki idea, but i personally would feel
better if i know all editors by email-adress ;-)
regards, hussayn
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>> ...Agreed. Perhaps just a section at the top of each page for
>> "Reviewed by
>> <author> at <date>" declarations?
>
>
> Something like that - see Hussayn's message and references, this was
> discussed recently.
>
>> Another bit of important metadata is the Cocoon version (2.0.x or 2.1)
>> that the doc applies to.
>
>
> Yes, and as the Wiki does versioning, one can even imagine being able to
> "go back in time" online in the docs to find out about info that was
> valid for a given version...
>
> -Bertrand
>
--
Dr. Hussayn Dabbous
SAXESS Software Design GmbH
Neuenhöfer Allee 125
50935 Köln
Telefon: +49-221-56011-0
Fax: +49-221-56011-20
E-Mail: dabbous@saxess.com
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
> ...Agreed. Perhaps just a section at the top of each page for
> "Reviewed by
> <author> at <date>" declarations?
Something like that - see Hussayn's message and references, this was
discussed recently.
> Another bit of important metadata is the Cocoon version (2.0.x or 2.1)
> that the doc applies to.
Yes, and as the Wiki does versioning, one can even imagine being able
to "go back in time" online in the docs to find out about info that was
valid for a given version...
-Bertrand
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)
Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 09:01:26AM +0100, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Le Mercredi, 19 fév 2003, à 08:45 Europe/Zurich, Jeff Turner a écrit :
>
> >...So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki. It seems
> >the
> >best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual
> >wiki/xdoc
> >system would cause.
>
> I tend to agree but OTOH there must be some way for users to find out
> about the reliability of a document.
>
> Currently, I think the xdocs are viewed are "official" whereas the wiki
> is more like "melting pot" - the difference is easy, even though the
> good quality of many wiki docs makes it more blurred in practice.
>
> So I think, if in the future all docs are done on a wiki, some form of
> metadata/review system is required so that the state and validity of a
> particular document is clearly visible.
Agreed. Perhaps just a section at the top of each page for "Reviewed by
<author> at <date>" declarations?
Another bit of important metadata is the Cocoon version (2.0.x or 2.1)
that the doc applies to.
--Jeff
> -Bertrand
>
>
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
Le Mercredi, 19 fév 2003, à 10:14 Europe/Zurich, Jeff Turner a écrit :
> ...
> @cocoon-version 2.0.4 -> has URL '/wiki/2.0.4/CocoonCaching'.
> @cocoon-version 2.1' -> has URL '/wiki/2.1/CocoonCaching'.
The cool thing would be to couple "2.0.4" with a version management tag
a la CVS...
i.e. "2.0.4" would retrieve the version of the page that has been
marked valid for 2.0.4, but there would be only one CocoonCaching page.
-Bertrand
P.S.
LOUD VOICE OFFSTAGE TO MYSELF: now stop it! you're dreaming up stuff
again instead of actually working ;-)
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by Stephan Michels <st...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Jeff Turner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 09:02:42AM +0100, SAXESS - Hussayn Dabbous wrote:
> > Hy;
> >
> > The mentioning of "Wiki" triggered my curiousity:
> >
> > If we move all docs to Wiki, then how can we maintain
> > different release versions of the docs ?
> >
> > Or will there be only one single document version, that
> > fits for all released cocoon versions ?
>
> Many docs will be applicable to both versions. Many will apply to only
> one version. Is anything beyond a page naming convention required to
> distinguish the two?
>
> > Or do you propose to connect Wiki with an underlying
> > document management system?
>
> Underlying what? :) Back in my day, ice-creams were 5c each, school was
> a 10 mile walk through blizzards, and filesystems were good enough for
> everyone.
>
> But yes, that is a good point. Being able to roll back files is probably
> essential for serious doc use. We could simply set up a logrotate script
> on the server to back up each day's content.
Perhaps the Slide block is an option. It's support versioning, metadata
etc. If you want, you can use a WebDAV server. There are more than one
possible stores, which can be used(File, JDBC, ...). I know that
Software AG formally known as Tamino used Slide.
Just a thought, Stephan Michels.
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)
Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 09:02:42AM +0100, SAXESS - Hussayn Dabbous wrote:
> Hy;
>
> The mentioning of "Wiki" triggered my curiousity:
>
> If we move all docs to Wiki, then how can we maintain
> different release versions of the docs ?
>
> Or will there be only one single document version, that
> fits for all released cocoon versions ?
Many docs will be applicable to both versions. Many will apply to only
one version. Is anything beyond a page naming convention required to
distinguish the two?
> Or do you propose to connect Wiki with an underlying
> document management system?
Underlying what? :) Back in my day, ice-creams were 5c each, school was
a 10 mile walk through blizzards, and filesystems were good enough for
everyone.
But yes, that is a good point. Being able to roll back files is probably
essential for serious doc use. We could simply set up a logrotate script
on the server to back up each day's content.
Also, JSPWiki's "Wiki.jsp?page=<blah>" URI space is horribly non-portable
and un-cool[1], but that can be fixed in 5 minutes with
request.getPathInfo(). Perhaps we could introduce a '@cocoon-version
{2.1|2.0.x}' tag to the cwiki syntax. So Wiki.jsp?page=CocoonCaching
with:
@cocoon-version 2.0.4 -> has URL '/wiki/2.0.4/CocoonCaching'.
@cocoon-version 2.1' -> has URL '/wiki/2.1/CocoonCaching'.
Hmm..
--Jeff
> regards, hussayn
...
[1] http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)
Posted by Jeff Turner <je...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 09:02:42AM +0100, SAXESS - Hussayn Dabbous wrote:
> Hy;
Let's move this thread over to cocoon-docs..
--Jeff
...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by SAXESS - Hussayn Dabbous <da...@saxess.com>.
Hy;
The mentioning of "Wiki" triggered my curiousity:
If we move all docs to Wiki, then how can we maintain
different release versions of the docs ?
Or will there be only one single document version, that
fits for all released cocoon versions ?
Or do you propose to connect Wiki with an underlying
document management system?
regards, hussayn
Jeff Turner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 03:11:44PM +1100, David Crossley wrote:
>
>>Diana Shannon wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>>I find it a PITA to have to update my HEAD **and** release cvs
>>>branches for simple document updates. It's frustrating to have
>>>doc updates dependencies on a HEAD branch that doesn't reliably
>>>build. I think a separate CVS branch/block/module would be a
>>>definite improvement of the existing situation, but I still think
>>>Wiki should remain the way a majority of people contribute/patch
>>>docs. In fact, I think we should consider moving all existing
>>>Cocoon docs straight to Wiki, so people can patch them there.
>>>I proposed it early, when Cocoon's Wiki started, but I backed
>>>off, given the fact it looked like a way to run around Forrest --
>>>which I didn't want to do. However, now with Wiki's increasing
>>>integration to Forrest (and Steven's ideas of converting wiki
>>>docs via site.xml or similar), it makes increasing sense to me.
>>
>>Will people be able to do both ways - traditional patch/create
>>xdocs in cvs, or via the Wiki?
>
>
> With Chaperon integration, the next version of Forrest should be able to
> handle cwiki and xdoc formats equally well.
>
>
>>Online editing might be okay for people in well-connected countries.
>>However, for the rest of us, working online via dial-up modem through a
>>clumsy web interface is not productive.
>
>
> Well, with the wiki, you click 'edit', make your change, click 'save',
> and that's it.
>
> With CVS, you have to:
>
> - Download a CVS client
> - Install it, Learn how to use it, work out the pserver string, bang
> your head against CVS_RSH, eventually get it right.
> - For many users, discover for the first time that a firewall blocks
> port 2401, and you've wasted your time.
> - Wait n hours for 34M of Cocoon to download
> - find the xdoc you want to edit, build docs, wait, rinse, repeat
> - Search the web for "how to create a patch". Finally figure out 'cvs
> diff -u'.
> - Create a bugzilla account, create a doc enhancement request.
>
> And that's your afternoon, if not your whole day, down the drain.
>
> Moving to Forrest will make the edit turnaround cycle faster, at the
> expense of an extra 10mb download.
>
> So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki. It seems the
> best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual wiki/xdoc
> system would cause.
>
>
> --Jeff
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
--
Dr. Hussayn Dabbous
SAXESS Software Design GmbH
Neuenhöfer Allee 125
50935 Köln
Telefon: +49-221-56011-0
Fax: +49-221-56011-20
E-Mail: dabbous@saxess.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
"Jeff Turner" <je...@apache.org> wrote:
> So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki. It seems the
> best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual wiki/xdoc
> system would cause.
I disagree on that. IMO the "Wiki" syntax doesn't have the capability to
contextualize the information contained in the document (how can we tell
that a "screenshot" is different from a "configuration file snippet?" - in
"Wiki" it's all a big <PRE>...</PRE> whatever).
Otherwise, what's the point of using XML anyway. I could use FrontPage and
web folders and get done with it...
Pier
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
"Jeff Turner" <je...@apache.org> wrote:
> So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki. It seems the
> best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual wiki/xdoc
> system would cause.
I disagree on that. IMO the "Wiki" syntax doesn't have the capability to
contextualize the information contained in the document (how can we tell
that a "screenshot" is different from a "configuration file snippet?" - in
"Wiki" it's all a big <PRE>...</PRE> whatever).
Otherwise, what's the point of using XML anyway. I could use FrontPage and
web folders and get done with it...
Pier
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs module or block)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@codeconsult.ch>.
Le Mercredi, 19 fév 2003, à 08:45 Europe/Zurich, Jeff Turner a écrit :
> ...So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki. It seems
> the
> best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual
> wiki/xdoc
> system would cause.
I tend to agree but OTOH there must be some way for users to find out
about the reliability of a document.
Currently, I think the xdocs are viewed are "official" whereas the wiki
is more like "melting pot" - the difference is easy, even though the
good quality of many wiki docs makes it more blurred in practice.
So I think, if in the future all docs are done on a wiki, some form of
metadata/review system is required so that the state and validity of a
particular document is clearly visible.
-Bertrand
Re: xdoc -> wiki documentation (Re: documentation in separate cvs
module or block)
Posted by Stephan Michels <st...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 19 Feb 2003, Jeff Turner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 03:11:44PM +1100, David Crossley wrote:
> > Diana Shannon wrote:
> >
> > Will people be able to do both ways - traditional patch/create
> > xdocs in cvs, or via the Wiki?
>
> With Chaperon integration, the next version of Forrest should be able to
> handle cwiki and xdoc formats equally well.
I think too ;-)
> > Online editing might be okay for people in well-connected countries.
> > However, for the rest of us, working online via dial-up modem through a
> > clumsy web interface is not productive.
>
> Well, with the wiki, you click 'edit', make your change, click 'save',
> and that's it.
>
> With CVS, you have to:
>
> - Download a CVS client
> - Install it, Learn how to use it, work out the pserver string, bang
> your head against CVS_RSH, eventually get it right.
> - For many users, discover for the first time that a firewall blocks
> port 2401, and you've wasted your time.
> - Wait n hours for 34M of Cocoon to download
> - find the xdoc you want to edit, build docs, wait, rinse, repeat
> - Search the web for "how to create a patch". Finally figure out 'cvs
> diff -u'.
> - Create a bugzilla account, create a doc enhancement request.
>
> And that's your afternoon, if not your whole day, down the drain.
>
> Moving to Forrest will make the edit turnaround cycle faster, at the
> expense of an extra 10mb download.
>
> So I agree with Diana about moving all docs to the Wiki. It seems the
> best long-term solution, avoiding all the problems that a dual wiki/xdoc
> system would cause.
Just a short story of the project, in which I currently working on.
I working in a E-Learning project(The biggest in germany), in which 15
different universities are involved. Our system consist of a Cocoon and
Slide core. We offer two different options to write their content: XML
and Tex. The Tex content will be converted in a internally pipeline into
the XML format. The author can modify their content over WebDAV. The most
used Editor is XMLSpy, which can direct operate with WebDAV. The option,
to write content in a WebForm, is the option, which I missing.
It's sometimes a plague, how stupid our authors are. The funniest thing
was removing the root path *doh*.
I started to believe that a simple WebForm should achieve our needs, since
I was impressed by the popularity of wiki :-/
Stephan Michels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org