[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

documentation was Re: Worked around (dirty...)

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 03:18:07PM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote:
> a recent discussion on another list I am on mentioned frustrations at
> the LDP for many of the same reasons: converting it to the 'not simple
> for beginners format' Docbook - which they said the LDP did not provide
> an 'example' to get a quick start. 

They will actually do the conversion for you and are very nice--I'm too
much of a markup snob to let someone else do it for me though. ;) I'm
actually working with them now to improve some of their DocBook templates
so that they produce cleaner HTML. The barrier to entry seems to be
well-written documentation, not the markup language...

Basically the submission process goes like this:
	- offer an abstract of what you're thinking about writing
	- sometimes people say, "have you seen this, I think it's the same as
	  what you're proposing"
	- write the documentation in whatever format is easiest for you
	- convert the documentation to DocBook (OPTIONAL: if you want an LDP
	  volunteer will do this step for you)
	- choose a license -- If you ask for their recommendation the LDP
	  recommends the GNU FDL. It is not required that you use this
	- submit your file for review (via email); wait for feedback
	- review feedback (I didn't have any major changes other than grammar
	  but this step may include re-writing or cleaning up grammar or
	- submit your file (via email) for inclusion on the web site

With the exception of the Author Guide being *totally* overwhelming, it's
a pretty straight forward process. They have two mailing lists that I'm
subscribed to: discuss and docbook. Everyone is very friendly and responds
quickly to questions. If anyone else out there has already written
documentation and is looking to submit it to a wider audience I absolutely
recommend getting in touch with the LDP. www.tldp.org


Emma Jane Hogbin
[[ 416 417 2868 ][ www.xtrinsic.com ]]

Reply to: