[Zope] Re: documentation defacement

[Tres Seaver]

Fred Drake wrote:

> I've no objection what-so-ever to making the documents annotatable,
> though it's not clear to me that BackTalk is the right way to do it. 
> The problems I see are:
> 
> 1. General editing in the non-canonical location is bad, and
> misleading for potential contributors.  This is especially true for
> occaisional contributors like me.

Not being able to work in the "canonical" location at all kills the 
"ongoing contributor" pool, which is worse.

> 2. Being able to incrementally update from the maintained version
> without losing annotations seems necessary, unless we require that all
> annotations be handled or integrated by the time the update is
> performed.  Such a requirement is not acceptable.
> 
> I don't know if BackTalk can be used that way, or can be easily
> modified to do so.
> 
> Given the synchonization issue, I'd gladly give up the annotations if
> the documents became easier to update, and have the updates actually
> make it to the published version (regardless of where that is).

The BackTalk version *is* the canonical version for Zope 2.7, so the 
synchronization issue doesn't exist.

-1 to moving the project *anywhere* except to zope.org.

-1 to moving it to zope.org until after its "author-hostile" problems
    get fixed.

+1 to turning of annotations for the 2.6 version of the book on zope.org
    (any value there is long lost).

Tres.
-- 
===============================================================
Tres Seaver                                tseaver at zope.com
Zope Corporation      "Zope Dealers"       http://www.zope.com