On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 5:16 AM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Luciano Resende <[email protected]> wrote: >> I have noticed that people have started to be more active on writing >> 2.x documentation, but they are being scattered all over the different >> wikis we have. I'd like to suggest we concentrate in using the 2.x >> documentation wiki [1] which is linked from the website as the proper >> documentation for 2.x. If there are issues with that, let me know and >> I can volunteer to make it better. I will also try to move some of the >> existent 2.x contents to the 2.x documentation wiki. >> >> [1] http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYxDOCx2x/Index >> > > There are some problems with using the TUSCANYxDOCx2x wiki space. It > doesnt seem to get built into the Tuscany website so links have to be > to cwiki.apache.org instead of tuscany.apache.org which the cwiki doc > says we shouldn't do. It also means that search engines don't index > the doc in the cwiki space which i think would really need to be fixed > if we're going to use it. And, I dont know how to say it other than > just saying it - IMHO TUSCANYxDOCx2x doesn't look very good, i know it > was done this way to try to get the automated PDF generation working > but its not consistent with the rest of the Tuscany website and it > doesn't look great. > > ...ant >
This is good feedback, so let me see if I understand it correct : - We need to export it to be accessible via tuscany.apache.org - We need to make it look and feel similar to our website scheme. How about the navigation style ? My original idea wasn't really about the PDF only, but the navigation style that looked more like a documentation divided into chapters then just a plain website... I'll see if I can apply the feedback above and still maintain the navigation style. -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/
