On 28 Oct 2005, at 02:53, Dan Shafer wrote:
Several years ago, I headed up a project which involved an
extensive documentation effort and this same issue was raised. I
like the way we solved it. Furthermore, I happen to have access to
the tool and a server where it could be deployed and would make
both freely available if: (a) at least one or two others would be
willing to share site management and editing chores; and (b) the
community thinks it's a good idea. The approach we used was akin to
a discussion board. Each section of the docs was a topic on the
board. Everyone who was a member (and that term could be loosely
defined, of course) could add their comments to a section of the
docs. There was also a general topic area where people could post
questions and suggestions about the docs in their totality.
Periodically, an editor assigned to a given section would go
through the comments, incorporate the suggestions that made sense,
edit the topic, create a new topic on that section, hibernate the
old, and move comments that remained relevant to the new topic area.
At the same time there was a way for any interested party to: (a)
see the docs without the comments; (b) navigate using only the
"official" docs; and (c) view and print (and save as PDF) all or
some of the currently official documentation. This model is called
"managed open collaboration" and I think it presents the best of
all possible worlds in terms of encouraging and incorporating
useful input without disrupting the accuracy or utility of the
original and modified documentation.
Yes - wish i could write like that :)
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
