Wine FAQ - call for a volunteer
Dimitrie O. Paun
dpaun at rogers.com
Fri Nov 1 15:29:20 CST 2002
On November 1, 2002 04:02 pm, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> I agree that using a static web page for the FAQ part instead could
> probably be better - but for the troubleshooting content ??
> The troubleshooting content is meant to be a step-by-step problem solver
> area (and it is, to some extent). Now tell me how you'd implement the
> same thing easily with an ordinary web page, without losing flexibility
> for very quick changes/reordering ??
Well, for one thing, this should not be in the FAQ, but a separate
troubleshooting section. Second, I *know* I don't want to see the
FOM as a user. It's just bad. Beyond words! :) I don't understand
why you want this very quick changes/reordering flexibility. It
just seems we're trying to fix the wrong problem. We don't need a
tool to help us add hundred of pages, because nobody will bother
to read them. We need to think how we can present the information
in a few pages. Tops. If not, we are better off spending the time
fixing the problems, rather than documenting workarounds on
hundreds of pages.
More information about the wine-devel