In "Setting up Writer", it goes on at length about many of the general options pages. Is this going to be repeated under every component's "Setting up" guide? If so, changes/fixes need to be synchronized. I'd rather have it in only one place.
Most people only use Writer (or Word) and expect everything to be there without
having to scout around for it. People that use other packages, such as
spreadsheeting, are more used to the idea of scouting around and looking back at
the basics in Writer (or Word) documentation. I agree about keeping it in one
place.
Regards from
Tom 
The plan for the OOo docs is to put common material into files which
are then linked into the chapters in various books, so any edits would
be done in one place but the material appears in several places. This
plan has not been implemented yet. Would be good if the LibO team did
so.
Jean
Hi,
The plan for the OOo docs is to put common material into files which
are then linked into the chapters in various books, so any edits would
be done in one place but the material appears in several places. This
plan has not been implemented yet. Would be good if the LibO team did
so.
This sounds like the best approach to me.
David Nelson
The linked sections will need to be embedded in the copy that is put
on the wiki for public download. The Alfresco handling of a working
copy and a published copy will be great for this.
Jean
How would this work in practice on the Alfresco site? Where would the common
files be stored, and (more importantly) how would they be referenced in the
linked sections? And how would that work when someone has downloaded a file
(containing those linked sections) to work on?
I think I know how to do this with files stored on the ODFAuthors site,
which has a fairly straightforward directory hierarchy that I can duplicate
on my computer, but I'm not at all sure about Alfresco.
Hal
Hi,
How would this work in practice on the Alfresco site? Where would the common
files be stored, and (more importantly) how would they be referenced in the
linked sections? And how would that work when someone has downloaded a file
(containing those linked sections) to work on?I think I know how to do this with files stored on the ODFAuthors site,
which has a fairly straightforward directory hierarchy that I can duplicate
on my computer, but I'm not at all sure about Alfresco.
For me, the most logical place to store them is where people like you
think is the most logical place to store them.
So my idea is that you guys should think about what you reckon you
need, and we'll set that up for you.
Also if you have reservations about the way anything is set up on the
Alfresco site (folder structures and whatever else), please do let me
know and we can figure out how to change things accordingly. I'm sure
you'll agree that the idea of a decent tool is that it should do much
more adapting to fit your needs than you have to do to fit in with it.
I haven't done any file merges within Alfresco, so I can't give you
definite info about it. But I will look into the matter quickly.
However, I am *pretty* sure it won't be a problem. Alfresco stores all
the files within the server's file system (not as objects in a
database), so it would probably be done pretty much the same as on
someone's local computer. Therefore, you should only have to know the
directories in which files live on the server OS.
But I'll get back to you about this soon.
David Nelson
For me, a logical place would be a space called "Common Files" under "en".
I couldn't figure out how to determine what the actual directories are in
Alfresco. I hope it is, in fact, easy to duplicate on a local computer, as
that should solve the problem.
Hal
Hi,
For me, a logical place would be a space called "Common Files" under "en".
OK, I set that up.
I couldn't figure out how to determine what the actual directories are in
Alfresco. I hope it is, in fact, easy to duplicate on a local computer, as
that should solve the problem.
I'll get back to you with more info about that soon, but I think you
can safely work on the basis of the spaces (folders) tree structure as
currently implemened on Alfresco.
Does the current tree structure look OK to you? Not overly complex?
It's got all that's needed? Is there stuff that's not needed? Etc?
David Nelson
Current tree structure (within the en space) looks ok to me, though I'm sure
that with more use we'll find that bits need to be added or deleted.
Hal