Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 20:25:45 +0200 From: Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org> To: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Ken Smith <kensmith@cse.Buffalo.EDU> Subject: Re: The FAQ (was Re: Creating an Admin Handbook) Message-ID: <20040720182545.GA76560@abigail.blackend.org> In-Reply-To: <20040720132604.2f0ced26@localhost> References: <20040719100354.GA90972@hub.freebsd.org> <20040720103432.GA64597@clan.nothing-going-on.org> <20040720104501.GB5405@hub.freebsd.org> <20040720124337.GA8096@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> <20040720140759.GA69951@abigail.blackend.org> <20040720144725.GE17260@hub.freebsd.org> <20040720132604.2f0ced26@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 01:26:04PM -0400, Tom Rhodes wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 14:47:25 +0000 > Murray Stokely <murray@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 04:07:59PM +0200, Marc Fonvieille wrote: > > > Why FAQ is not really used/read? It's difficult to answer to that > > > question but I assume cause it's less "famous" and cause the human being > > > is lazy, it's an effort to go read the Handbook, so switching to the FAQ > > > is too much :) and since the FAQ is not linked (and not detailled) from > > > the Handbook, people ignore it. It's not wrong to tell that a lot of > > > people ignore the FAQ exists. (I know there is an old project to > > > link/merge the FAQ in a dynamic way with the Handbook) > > > The more you split a document the more you will fell in a such > > > situation. > > > > I don't think it's a fair comparison since the FAQ is written in a > > much less formal style than the rest of our documentation. It is also > > HUGE for a 'FAQ' and people just aren't used to wading through such a > > huge list of boring error messages that don't apply to them, and > > information about pieces of hardware they've never heard of before > > they get to something that is relevant for them. > > Most user *I* have conversations with have stated that they > avoid the FAQ completely in favor of the more thorough > instruction provided by the handbook. Only after double > checking their steps with the handbook will they check the > FAQ, google, lists, etc. > I was not clear in my message: of course the FAQ is not a detailled documentation to set up your system etc. it's a FAQ. On this point you cannot compare it with the Handbook. I was talking about the fact people hardly use/read it. A lot of questions asked on the various mailing lists, newsgroups, etc. around the world are still the same and are documented in the FAQ: for example allowing ordinary users to mount a disk, booting with the win2k/xp/etc. loader, recovering a forgotten root password, etc... As I said it "seems" people, when they read a doc, only read the Handbook. I was just "afraid" of the fact splits could give birth of docs too much different, I mean with a an important separation between each book, the reader spending his time switching between books or reading one book only. It's why I think having a general table of contents may be a good idea. Marc Marc
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040720182545.GA76560>