FAQ - Writers needed!

[openstream]

I'm afraid, but I think you missed the point. I didn't want to make the case for or against TYPO3. This here is about documentation, isn't it? What could be easier to use than an open document template (XML) to create documentation that can be reused in many ways, i.e. to convert to HTML for displaying on a website, to convert to PDF for offline reading, etc.
If you don't like TYPO3 we can use the generic class mentioned above.
The main point is about providing a good base to inspire the community to create documentation. And you can see that the TYPO3 community is a great success in this regard.

[MicCo]

I'm not against your suggestion, I just made a point to keep in mind!

Nothing to do with TYPO3 in that manner, but as stated, don't force people to use an specific application for doing an job as write an FAQ, that can be made in siple flat-file and imported into what ever You want to use for make it XML, PDF, etc.

[openstream]

I agree. Let's see how it will all come out in the end. The main thing is that there is some documentation at all. If it's nicely structured and reusable - all the better

[MicCo]

openstream Wrote:I agree. Let's see how it will all come out in the end. The main thing is that there is some documentation at all. If it's nicely structured and reusable - all the better

That's what it's all about!

[ephigenie]

i've got phpmyfaq installed ... this allows us to receive questions of users transparently.

export can be done via xml, flatfile or even pdf. Via XSLT it should be possible to transform the xml output to whatever we want as a publishing document.
So in my opinion this is a good way to let the faq grow and contain useful information. And it is administrateable...

The same appears for the manual - i like the idea of a "living" manual (as practiced by lighttpd i.e.) only a few pages are set "read-only" (which means can only be changed by wiki-admins) but most of them can be changed by normal users.

On this way we got a manual which is in a good usability and exportable via plugins in different ways (currently only plain-text enabled)
But this way we can hope we get more people to write into the manual so that it reaches a good grade of completeness and perhaps helpful user-experiences in addition written down there.

[porphyrous]

It appears you have the task well in hand. I am unsure of the nationalities of the people involved here and their languages, but I offer myself as a proofreader for standard American English if you like. E-mail me if you can use me.

David V

[ephigenie]

hm we need actually people writing faq's - proofreading them is the second step....

[Kermit]

ephigenie Wrote:hm we need actually people writing faq's - proofreading them is the second step....

I think the two could go in parallels... I write 5 FAQ, he correct 5 FAQ, where is the trouble?

Anycase, as mantions in the ML, I'm available to fill some faq, some at a time...

[ephigenie]

yeah ok - i don't see a problem here
It's just that we primary need more Documentation
that was all i was saying. And then : for sure I'm glad if someone wants to help - and we need people doing things like that.

Perhaps thats my bad english preventing me from hiding my question too good for him
So i may ask directly if he'd like to write some faq also ?

[Kermit]

Don't warry ephi! ^_^
Mine also was just a tought... my english is surely worse than your!

I'll take a trip into the faw system asap! And of course, if Porphyrous wants to do the same, he will be welcomed!!!