Benjamin Adida wrote:
> on 5/24/00 12:02 PM, Vince Vielhaber at vev@michvhf.com wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 24 May 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> >> That is quite interesting. Let me CC this over to the hackers/docs
> >> lists to see if we want to do this for our main docs.
> >>
> >> As for my book, I want those messages sent to me so I can fix them or
> >> add information to the book. I think maybe we want the same thing for
> >> the manuals. We want to get suggestions so we can compile them into the
> >> manuals and add to them, rather than having comments, but I am
> >> interested to hear what others say.
> >
> > By "interactive" I ass/u/me Poul is referring to PHP's annotated manual.
> > I've found that to save me HOURS due to oddball little quirks that someone
> > else discovered first and noted in the annotated docs.
> >
> > I'd not only support this, if it's wanted I'll make sure it's implemented.
>
> I'm not trying to start any kind of war, but since OpenACS is being
> considered for community management already, it can automatically set up
> HTML file annotation with no extra effort. All you do is add the HTML files
> to the doc directory and sync up with the database (one click), and you've
> got user-contributed annotations (with moderation if you so desire).
>
> This is similar to Philip Greenspun's photo.net docs.
>
> -Ben
If OpenACS has the features that I've mentioned, then I see no need to re-invent
the wheel.
When will we be able to use OpenACS?
- Poul L. Christiansen
