mindlace at imeme
Jun 13, 2000, 8:22 AM
Post #1 of 1
(270 views)
Permalink
|
|
Documentation Page Changes
|
|
Paul Everitt wrote:
>
> Yeh, my ideas are a little bit more radical. I was thinking in terms of
> adding value in different ways beyond organizing, by putting in some
> editorial.
>
> Thus, instead of saying:
>
> Zope Guides
>
> * Content Managers
>
> ...I'd explain more about the Content Managers guide, and provide more
> directly addressable links.
It says "The Zope Content Manager's Guide introduces Zope and gives a gentle
introduction to creating and manipulating web objects." This explains the link
in my mind. What do you mean by directly accessable links?
> Also, I was thinking about having the equivalent of "spotlight on" areas
> for documentation. When something fun comes out, like Andrew Kuchling's
> article, or the intro to Zope on LinuxPlanet this week, or a great How
> To, find a way to bring it into view an onto people's radar.
I think this is a good idea: I'll implement it.
> I was also hoping to get a regular, weekly review of some artifact.
> Actually, I think this is better done on the home page:
Hm. I think we need to be cautious about what we put on the home page. The 5
main topic items that are there already pretty much hit the limit of things that
people will look at, I think. I'm certainly not against having a section in the
ZWN.
> """
> This weeks's hot picks:
>
> Docs: Ever wonder how to use Apache's mod_proxy to interface with Zope?
> In the _Zope and mod_proxy How To_, Joe Sixpack goes into depth on this.
> Three stars out of four.
>
> Products: .....
>
> Site: .....
>
> _More_...
> """
>
> And _More_ would lead to expanded reviews of each pick, plus links to
> old picks.
Expanded reviews of each pick? So there would be an extended review ( 200 words
+ ) of a product, a doc, and some site feature every week? This is fairly labor
intensive. If the community could submit reviews, that might work, but it
probably would lose a weekly flavor.
> Let's see, back to the docs page, I was thinking about reorganizing it.
> Instead of focusing on kinds of artifacts as the first level
> organization, instead focus on audiences.
Hm. I personally dislike focus on audiences because I've traditionally been a
one-man band. I think this is also a recipie for redundancy. Almost everyone
needs the DTML reference, for example.
I'm trying to come up with other categories than content managers. Unless we go
ahead and categorize the how- tos by audience, the pickings are going to be very
lean for Zope Administrators, for example.
> Content Managers
>
> Is your job creating and managing information stored in Zope, perhaps
> with a little scripting of that information? Never expect to see a
> programming language? The you're a content manager, and Zope is for you.
>
> Start with the _Content Managers Guide_ (_PDF_: 480Kb, _HTML_: 120 Kb)
> to quickly get an overview of working with Zope. Next, ...
>
> Don't forget, Zope 2.2 now ships with an online help system, including
> an interactive tutorial!
>
> _More_
>
> For each audience we can point them at the five most important things,
> then link them to a subpage that provides more complete intepretation.
I think that the Documentation page is too big. I think the changes we're
looking at penalize people that know what document they want and want to use it
for reference (something I do all the time).
In a general sense, perhaps we should start to consider having a "newbie bit" or
somesuch so that experienced users can get to content quickly and newbies can be
hand-held. Or Zope-web Geddon needs to focus on letting people customize their
experience with zope-web.
~ethan
|
