Re: jrb's help ideas

[David Merrill <david lupercalia net>]

On Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 03:46:04PM -0700, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> On Mon, 2001-09-03 at 13:58, David Merrill wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 03, 2001 at 03:52:50AM -0400, Jonathan Blandford wrote:
> > > "Rebecca J. Walter" <rjp mail tele dk> writes:
> > > 
> > > > i have one addition.  this help browser should be capable of loading an
> > > > average help file in under 15 seconds on a typical user machine.
> > > 
> > > <snip>
> > > 
> > > I don't think anyone wants to wait 25 seconds for a help-browser to
> > > popup.  Recent versions of nautilus are much improved speed wise.
> > > Nonetheless, I think that there is likely to be lighter help browser
> > > available so that people have an option if needed.  That's the point
> > > behind the spec.
> > 
> > The whole `help browser' concept is flawed. Why can't the help be made
> > available via http so any web browser can be used? Hell, you could
> > write it in perl or python if you wanted.
> > 
> > I'm both a gnome and a kde user -- I go back and forth depending
> > on what I'm doing. I don't want to see my system help changing
> > depending on which desktop I'm using. I really don't want to learn two
> > help systems. And, I'm often not using a desktop at all, and I still
> > need to get to help on the console.
> > 
> > Providing help at the console is *not* *optional*.
> 
> Having help available at the console is not optional.  GNOME is a
> graphical environment.  How often are you going to want to look at the
> Evolution docs when you're not running at least X, if not Evolution
> itself?  Check out xml.apache.org, cocoon seems to be just what you're
> talking about.

Your argument is based on the assumption that the help is limited to
Gnome documentation. There are many other types of documentation for
applications that don't need a gui at all.

> Since GNOME is a desktop platform, we really can make some assumptions
> that can't be made with "web publishing", which is what David is really
> interested in.  We can take a few shortcuts because we're a desktop, and
> these may allow us to deliver more features in less time.  In the end,
> web publishing may be the way to go, but I think that in the GNOME 2
> timeframe, it's out of the question.  As always, IMHO, and YMMV, and all
> that crap.  

If those shortcuts need to be made, then I guess you'll have to make
them. I hope to convince you that it is indeed a shortcut and not the
optimal long term solution.

-- 
Dr. David C. Merrill                     http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project                   david lupercalia net
Collection Editor & Coordinator            http://www.linuxdoc.org

Free Dmitry Sklyarov!  http://www.freesklyarov.org
Washington DC Protests http://www.lupercalia.net/dmca