On 3/14/06, Markus Neteler <neteler@itc.it> wrote:
> So, now that I've settled into the post-doc life, I've got a few hours
> in the evening to spend time giving back to the GRASS community. It
> seems to me that one thing GRASS could really use is some better free
> documentation. The link to documentation from the main page goes to a
> "Help!" message and links to a list that hasn't been used much for
> years. The GRASS WIKI might be a good place to do this, but the
> organization of the wiki is not clear to me. Who is in charge of
> documentation and where can I help?
Do you mean writing docs? A couple of people, spreaded over the
internet.
Or the web site? Unfortunately almost me, but all developers have
write access to modify the Web site as well (it just rarely
happens).
I don't want to duplicate efforts. If there is already a plan in place
for documentation, how can I pitch in? If there is no plan, how do we
go about getting one in place?
My vision is for something more than just a description of the
buttons. Instead, something that would describe how to do things the
"GRASS way". Probably spread across of few documents:
1) Installation Manual
2) Tutorial
3) A Comprehensive User Guide (1 part text book, 1 part instruction manual)
4) Advanced Geoprocessing (Scripting, Batch Processing, Internet Mapping, etc)
5) Programmers API
I am still working on the new grass.itc.it server and thought to
install a content management system on it (maybe Joomla?). Then
"roles" could be defined and power users could easily contribute.
Sounds reasonable?
Yes, access to the web would be useful for "products" such as a master
volume of documentation. But for development of the document(s) the
Wiki is probably a better place since it has a lower barrier to entry.
Also, users of the documents in early stages will understand from the
format that it is incomplete.
The more difficult thing is getting a system in place that will scale
as the documents grow from a few pages to hundreds of pages. It is
probably also important to settle on a format that can be adapted to
the web or printed manuals from a single source. I know some FOSS
projects have sophisticated solutions to this problem, but I know
nothing about it personally. I don't want the format so hard to learn
that people with a spare hour feel like they cannot contribute.
Documentation is a good way for non-programmers to contribute.
--
David Finlayson