________________________________
From: planas <jslozier@gmail.com>
To: documentation@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Thu, 23 June, 2011 16:16:48
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-documentation] HTML versions of the Guides
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 04:27 -0400, Marc Paré wrote:
Le 2011-06-23 02:30, David Nelson a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> My 2 cents would be that the best format for guides is .odt, plus a
> publication of the user-ready version in PDF.
>
> I don't think an HTML version would really be a useful idea.
>
> --
> David Nelson
>
I will chime in as well. I would rather see the ODF versions first and
the .pdf only if needed. We are, after all, telling people that we have
the best office suite on earth, so let's prove it! It does work!. I
would even go as far as not publishing any .pdf versions. People needing
documentation will have LibreOffice to read the ODF files. I would only
supply .pdf files if it involved anything with the installation of
LibreOffice.Cheers
Marc
--
Marc Paré
http://www.parEntreprise.com
I agree with ODF formats for our documentation and then other versions
as needed latter. When they are made, when can state the where
saved/exported for the LO, plugging some of the other capabilities of
LO.
I would not use htiml unless someone cleans up the code. Most program
generated html I have seen is very difficult to follow, debug, and
maintain without someone cleaning it up. Ofteh I have found myself
redoing the pages with hand coding only.
Jay Lozier
jslozier@gmail.com
Hi
+1
Except that i get over-excited about allowing people access easily so i fall
into rants about needing pdf too lol. Sorry about that Marc! I know Adobe and
MS both achieved market dominance partly through non-compliance but since they
achieved domination it's difficult to disrupt that. I think we have to pick
fights we can win first.
Regards from
Tom