> My point is that appropriate set of people should be > reviewing the documentation, just like an appropriate set of people guide > the design/architecture of CAS.
Point taken. > an active interest in gaining that experience. > > And I would suggest we identify a new documentation coordinator with > documentation experience to handle that It's becoming clear we have at lease some of the same core ideas on how to produce quality documentation: - Small, dedicated team with authority on documentation - Possess a balance of technical knowledge and writing skills/experience - Commitment to regular review > having tried to go through this before I'm well aware of > potential problems that will crop up with having the steering committee > review it once a year > ... > The make-up of the steering committee changes frequently enough > (each year) that I'd be uncomfortable giving that task to the steering > committee. One year it could be highly technical people who catch every > missing feature documentation, but totally blow the structure/organization > and in other years it could be the complete opposite. I think you make a compelling argument for a small documentation team lead by a Documentation Coordinator. I think we have to accept that high-quality documentation typically comes from folks paid to do it, since it requires a lot of work and isn't very attractive. Yet I'm hopeful we could recruit some folks to fill the position. M -- You are currently subscribed to cas-dev@lists.jasig.org as: arch...@mail-archive.com To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://www.ja-sig.org/wiki/display/JSG/cas-dev
