[kepler-dev] [Ptolemy] Re: Actor documentation

[Ferdinando Villa]

A hybrid approach could be to provide fixed docs with the distribution
and use a link from there to point to a web-based, editable wiki. The
wiki info could be integrated, used and reset at any new release of the
fixed docs, but it would remain easy for users to provide input. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: kepler-dev-bounces at ecoinformatics.org 
> [mailto:kepler-dev-bounces at ecoinformatics.org] On Behalf Of 
> Adam Cataldo
> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 2:12 PM
> To: Christopher Brooks
> Cc: ptresearch at chess.eecs.berkeley.edu; 'Kepler-Dev'
> Subject: Re: [kepler-dev] [Ptolemy] Re: Actor documentation
> 
> 
> I agree. I think the being able to edit the documentation would be 
> useful even for Kepler. Imagine I model some physical 
> phenomenon with a 
> Sinewave actor.  The documentation for the Sinewave actor 
> says nothing 
> about the physical process I am tryiing to model.  I might want to 
> change the documentation for this instance of the actor to 
> say what the 
> actor really does with respect to the model I'm looking at.
> 
> Cheers,
> Adam
> 
> Christopher Brooks wrote:
> > Here's a half baked idea.
> > 
> > I think it would be nice if users could update and comment on 
> > documentation.
> > 
> > I was thinking it would be cool to have some sort of wiki for actor 
> > documentation, or at least something so that users could annotate 
> > actor documentation.  The PhP website uses this to great advantage, 
> > see http://us2.php.net/manual/en/function.eregi.php
> > 
> > The beauty is that users tend to make note of things that weren't 
> > clear or "aha!" moments that they had.  Yah, the comments 
> don't make 
> > great reading, but I've found them really useful for PhP, 
> where I'm by 
> > no means an expert and often flailing around for a quick solution.
> > 
> > _Christopher
> > 
> > --------
> > 
> >     
> >     At 10:58 AM 12/19/2005 -0700, Laura L. Downey wrote:
> >     >I'm a little confused here.  Why would the user want 
> to edit the
> >     >documentation?  Or is this "edit" feature supposed to 
> be for creators of
> >     the
> >     >documentation?
> >     
> >     Yes, or to modify the documentation for an instance of 
> the actor,
> >     or to add documentation for a composite actor.  Can you 
> think of a better
> >     phrase than "Edit Documentation"?
> >     
> >     Edward
> >     
> >     [LLD>] 
> >     Oh I'm not opposed to the phrase "Edit Documentation," 
> I was just thinking
> >     that many of the Kepler users would not ever edit the 
> documentation, that i
> >    s
> >     sort of like an advanced feature -- maybe only creators 
> of new actors (the
> >     owners) would have the permission to edit the 
> associated documentation.  I
> >     would also expect that we wouldn't want the 
> documentation edited on the bas
> >    e
> >     set of actors that ships with Kepler.  But maybe my 
> assumptions are wrong..
> >    .
> >     I can't see any issue though with Ptolemy putting in 
> "Edit Documentation" a
> >    s
> >     a menu item.  Kepler can certainly hide or reveal the 
> menu item as
> >     appropriate, I would assume.  (un oh more assumptions ) :-)
> >      
> >     Laura
> >     
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     Kepler-dev mailing list
> >     Kepler-dev at ecoinformatics.org
> >     
> > 
> http://mercury.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/mailman/listinfo/
kepler-dev
> --------
> _______________________________________________
> Ptolemy maillist  -  Ptolemy at chess.eecs.berkeley.edu
> http://chess.eecs.berkeley.edu/ptolemy/listinfo/ptolemy
_______________________________________________
Kepler-dev mailing list
Kepler-dev at ecoinformatics.org
http://mercury.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/mailman/listinfo/kepler-dev