Re: Debian and relational/additional "projects/imaginatives/discussions" ?
Colin Watson wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2002 at 11:06:06AM +0200, Daniel Mose wrote:
> > This is kind of a weird subject for Debian-User.
> > In fact I am aware of that this subject might fit better under Debian Devel
> > (If at debian at all ??? )
>
> I would say that Debian is not really the forum for this, although the
> Debian Documentation Project might have some interest.
Does the Debian Documentation project have a forum where I can
present my thoughts in a clearer form?
> Debian is primarily a group of systems integrators; we pull together
> pieces of software and try to build it into the best distribution we
> can. Often this involves writing new software (dpkg, apt, debbugs,
> etc.), taking over primary maintenance of existing software (strace,
> blackbox, man-db), or working to debug problems that go beyond mere
> packaging.
I must say that this effort does look very impressive to me, and I have no
desire what so ever to change anything that is already within the Debian
concept.
> Creating a high-quality distribution naturally involves good
> documentation, and I think most people agree that there isn't enough
> good well-organized documentation for many pieces of free software nor
> for the system as a whole. As a result, Debian does end up writing a
> good deal of documentation. However, for the most part (man pages are
> perhaps an exception here), the documentation we write is for the system
> as a whole, and doesn't shy away from being Debian-specific when
> appropriate.
>
> Thus, if you want to improve documentation throughout free software,
> this is not really the place.
What I was trying to say ( though admitting failure ),was that I would like
to take part in a discussion to Develop a possible MethoD that would be of
help to Anybody that wants him/her to make sense to others in a written
document.
That is: Even though I might consider to actually try to improve a Specific
Debian document, this is not what I meant.
>
> I must admit that I found it extremely difficult to understand what you
> were talking about, and even now it seems to be too vague to prompt much
> meaningful discussion. This is probably a handicap if you're going to
> discuss good, clear documentation.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Colin Watson [cjwatson@flatline.org.uk]
>
As I Look back upon my prior posting I agree upon that it is very hard to
comprehend. It also has some characteristics which I really do like to avoid,
such as painfully long sentences that disconnects the document context.
I'm verry sorry for this.
The by me implied discussion would probably be much easier to follow than
I was. It would use Existing documents that are considered to be clearly
built in concept/context, by vote of the discussing participants as base
examples for developing some common simple rules for explanation.
It would also look up on the opposite kind of documents (considered to be
Unclear in concept/context) to achieve simple complementary rules in the other
direction.( How to un-explain something - which is of course Not desired by
any document writer.)
/Regards Daniel
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: