From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Max Techter Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Around again, and docs lead role Date: 12 May 2003 18:46:25 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <86r874ru3i.fsf@520000401788.dialin.t-online.de> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1052758881 5042 80.91.224.249 (12 May 2003 17:01:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 17:01:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Guile Development Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 12 19:01:19 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19FGey-0001FC-00 for ; Mon, 12 May 2003 19:00:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19FGfJ-0005bp-05 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 12 May 2003 13:00:41 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19FGem-0005EO-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 May 2003 13:00:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19FGef-000524-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 May 2003 13:00:02 -0400 Original-Received: from pop.gmx.de ([213.165.64.20] helo=mail.gmx.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19FGe5-0004Gm-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 May 2003 12:59:25 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 24536 invoked by uid 65534); 12 May 2003 16:59:23 -0000 Original-Received: from pD9E756E9.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO 520000401788.dialin.t-online.de) (217.231.86.233) by mail.gmx.net (mp021-rz3) with SMTP; 12 May 2003 18:59:23 +0200 Original-Received: from max by 520000401788.dialin.t-online.de with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19FGRV-0002Qa-00; Mon, 12 May 2003 18:46:25 +0200 Original-To: Neil Jerram In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 70 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2338 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2338 Neil Jerram writes: snip > > That said... is there anyone out there who'd be interested in taking > over the lead role on Guile documentation? > > I have three reasons for asking this: > > - I don't expect to have a _lot_ of time for Guile soon, and the docs > would benefit from someone with more time available. > > - I have other Guile interests that I'd like to spend some of that > time on. > > - A new pair of eyes could take a fresh look at the higher-level doc > issues such as overall organization, what kind of docs we need > (e.g. the cookbook idea) etc. > > Any takers? > Hi, I am new to guile, new to this list (though I posted a couple of replies concerning the overall structure, and the principle need of tutorials) I am not ready to offer to take the lead role on Guile documentation, but I offer to `throw in my two cent' as Thamer put it in a subsequent posting in this thread. Last weekend I managed to spare an evening for diving deeper into the `Guile Reference Manual', Edition 1.0, for use with Guile 1.6.2 The first impression I had was verified: A prototype of a documentation. Lacking an understandable high level structure. Inconsistent in things that should be common (Eg. sometimes the aim and the audience of the section is mentioned, sometimes not) Inconsistent in things that should vary (Eg. different sections, chapters, parts freely mix the level of the examples supplied) Right now I am adding up pall pen remarks to my printed version, these would normally go down the shredder, after I managed to extract my private documentation map. If you think, that in the current state of discussion, this kind of critique could be useful, tell me: hacking revised comments into, say the .texi source, would not put a too heavy workload on me. regards max. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel