The reason is, the wiki is easy to maintain. If a user finds an error, he fixes it, rather than pointing it to the official documentors who have to fix it; this takes more time and effort for all involved.
Plus, in my experience, most users knew more about the topic than I do. I found all I had to do was correct peoples' English... I can do that.
Dusty
]]>I am just curious why there isn't more documentation at:
http://www.archlinux.org/docs/en/
Is documentation not being accepted from users?
Are users not contributing?
Is the use of XHTML a barrier for people?
Also:
I was wondering about the use of XHTML for documentation format, and did a forum search of all things...
It seems that Latex was used at one point, but a simple XHTML template was adopted for ease of use. I am curious about how that decision looks today to those that deal with the documentation. Is maintaining it easier/harder than before?
I ask because I have personal documentation in various formats: Docbook, html, plaintext, OOo, pdf, etc. Docbook is a pain to use (at least from my point of view), but it exports to other formats nicely. I am going to take a stab at learning Latex in the next couple of weeks, so I will likely have another format laying around.
I am sure others have similar troubles with their documentation, and I was curious what the devs have learned over the course of the last year or so about the issue.
]]>