On Thu, Jul 02, 2009 at 01:59:01PM +0200, Mats Bengtsson wrote: > > Agreed! However, I don't think it's a good idea to hide something that > most people would expect to find in a good FAQ, as a level 2 section in > the learning manual. My proposal is simply to include a "FAQ" link which > is easily found on the web page and let it contain a link to the "When > things don't work" as well as to the Tutorial (or whatever is suited for > the "where's the application" type questions and possibly some more > place. ... > Don't be offended, Graham! I really like the effort you have put into > the docs and the organization of the docs, but sometimes it's like you > have been hit by the"not invented here" syndrome. What's wrong with > having a link called "FAQ" that provides yet another entry point into > the existing manuals, for people looking for information?
I'm not offended; I *do* have a "not invented here" syndrome. Just last week, I was ready to disregard one of Chip's suggestions until he created an html+css page to demonstrate what he was talking about (the 3-column idea for more pages). When I saw that, I immediately agreed with it. You're right about people easily missing LM 5.2 on the first read, and ironically the nice "intro docs / regular docs" division will make it *harder* to find LM 5.2 later on. (as an aside, I'm vaguely considering if LM 5 should be moved to the AU, along with some similar extra material. Trevor: don't worry, I wouldn't do anything like this without a concrete proposal and *much* more discussion) Anyway, I'm fine with a "FAQ: something isn't working! Answer: read @ref{When things don't work}". I'm even ok with a "FAQ: where's the application? Answer: read the @ref{Text input}", although I **really** don't think that will be necessary with out new webpage. I've done everything[1] possible to beat this into people's heads... [1] no, wait! If somebody gets lilypond as part of their linux package system, and clicks on "manuals", they'll miss all the warnings! Mao, foiled again! ... maybe I should add a @ref{Text input} to the docs-intro section, after all. Anyway*2, what other questions would you propose? My idea is that the FAQ should contain 4-10 questions. Currently, we have 1: Why do you change the syntax? 2: Something isn't working! 3: Where is the app (_maybe_) The webpages have changed a fair bit since the last time, so you might want to wait until draft 4 is online before answering. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user