Hey, vroom, I agree this is an excellent idea, along with a revamp of some of the more basic documentation (not all of it is accurate anymore) but I'd rather have you coding things than writing docs. Is there maybe a "Documentation Quest" where some of the users who've been around long enough to know all the details could submit improved documentation? I'd be willing to write some myself, if it weren't for the fact that I'm still tripping over things I don't know about the site.

I might do it anyway. <G> I'm sure I could count on my fellow Monastery dwellers to correct my mistakes.

- Ozymandias

Update: Hmmm. I see there's something in the air again. Here's what I really meant:

Experienced users submit their idea of improved FAQs and "How to be a Monk" documentation. More junior users could then ask about unclear items in the docs, or questions that aren't covered by the docs, and generally discuss things with the more senior members until we come up with a complete set of docs that's useful to the new guys (and hopefully, helps the senior people out by giving them a resource to point to) without gobbling up more masses of vroom's time. Got it? OK. I'm going to go see what they're putting in the air freshener...

Update Take 2: jcwren pointed out what I should have remembered seeing (or rather, what I did remember, once I saw it again) - the Perl Monks Documentation Project, where Level 5 monks and higher can create FAQs for various sections of the site. Which is all very well and good, but there's a problem; the people that are writing the FAQs are all experts with the site. There are NO new people involved. I think that causes a problem, because there are things that "everybody knows" which might not make it into the docs. I'm not saying the FAQ writers won't do a good job; looking at the list, I actually think they'll do an excellent job. But without the ability of the people for whom the FAQs are intended to comment and ask questions, the FAQs won't be the living documents they should be.

Or, maybe I'm wrong. Could happen...

In reply to RE: RE: New Linking Power by Ozymandias
in thread New Linking Power by vroom

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.