[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Cataloging LDP White Paper: Categorization
From: "David Lawyer" <email@example.com>
> (A lot a latency in this reply.)
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 01:04:20PM -0400, David C. Merrill, Ph.D. wrote:
> > mini-HOWTOs should die.
I still feel this way, but I'm not going to belabor the point if there is
no broad support. Instead, I am just going to make sure I keep both HOWTOS
and mini-HOWTOs cataloged in my index. And, I'm also going to add the
> The names of HOWTOs need to be recognizable at least by people who
> are advanced Linux users. Unfortunately, a HOWTO name may be a name
> of brand of hardware that is no longer popular. Thus only some
> old-timers might recognize it. One way to solve this problem is to
> have subordinate HOWTOs. For example a HOWTO on a certain brand of
> Modem, Printer, NIC would be categorized as a subordinate HOWTO to the
> main HOWTO such as Modem, Printer, NIC (there is only an
> Ethernet-HOWTO at present).
IMHO, this is not a good enough reason to split off into a second HOWTO. I
can see it theoretically happening, but so far this situation has not
There is a real, tangible benefit to minimizing the "splitting" of HOWTOs.
It is easier to find what you want when the information is (relatively)
consolidated based on subject area. IMHO, most of these situations are
better handled by relegating the "sub" information into a chapter rather
than another HOWTO.
David C. Merrill, Ph.D.
Linux Documentation Project
Collection Editor & Coordinator
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com