On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 4:17 PM, John Maher <JohnM_at_rotair.com> wrote:
> And the only reason I have been complaining about the documentation is hoping to point out areas where it is very unclear and misleading. Anyone who knows how to use the tool will never catch on to the poorly written areas of the documentation, they are biased. You NEED someone who doesn't know how to use the tool to indicate areas that need to be addressed. But since no one here is interested to maintaining good documentation and are more interested in hunting out any obscured word they can find just to say "look, it is right!!" it seems best if I never, ever point out any flaws in the documentation. I will just selfishly concern myself with my own problems, it seems all will get along better that way.
"But since no one here is interested to maintaining good documentation
..."? Oh come on. Of course we want good documentation, and feedback
to help improve it is more than welcome. But give the people on this
list some credit too, please.
Have you read the very first response you got, from Ryan Schmidt,
pointing you to the website of the book, where your feedback would be
Also, please keep in mind that the most useful feedback comes in the
form of concrete suggestions, or pointing out specific shortcomings.
If you say "I didn't find anything about X", and someone replies "it's
on page Y", then the feedback loop is closed. If you want your "not
finding about X" to be any further useful book feedback, you'll have
to argue why your non-finding is a book problem (rather than an "oops,
I looked at the wrong section" problem), and that it should be
explained or pointed to on page Z, or wherever you expected to find
info about it.
Received on 2013-08-12 21:54:34 CEST