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
license.
- 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
whatever)
- 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
--
Emma Jane Hogbin
[[ 416 417 2868 ][ www.xtrinsic.com ]]
Reply to: