🚀 go-pugleaf

M. Scott Heiman wrote:

> You have raised some good points here but I don't think the original poster
> intended to duplicate the help files.
I hope not!! Maybe the example was a bit misleading. What I ment was
that if you start something new from scratch you've got to ask yourself:
"If there are already tools that *can* to a good job, why is it that
they fail so often, and what have I got to do to make my product both
'idiot-' and 'genius-proof'?"
 
> I don't think that online help will ever replace written documentation.
That should be the motto of that web site!

> It almost sounds like you want Borland (or some other authority) to control
> the content of all web sites that discuss BC++.  It's not going to happen.
> What you find to be abstract and too theoretical may be just what another
> person needs to understand and solve his problem.  Everybody has their own
> way of expressing their ideas.  "How can you be sure that what you have
> found will be useful?", you can't until you read it.  "How can someone
> determine that what he has published (at his own expense and time) will be
> useful to someone else?", he can't unless you give him feedback. 

Well...., I defenitely do *not* want Borland to control anything. I was
thinking of a mixed group of people that goes over examples and checks
if they are understandable and comprehensive enough or not. That might
easily end up in two or three versions of basically the same example for
- let's say - newbies, oldtimers and C++ theorists. I do not think that
it's a good idea to confront a newbie with a page containing 65 links
about 'Setting the text in an edit control' and say: "Good luck, boy!
Make your choice!". You can still show all links but they should at
least be grouped by target group and sorted by something like: 'these
are what we find the best examples'.

> A lot of people have made very good comments.  There are already two great
> web sites that support BC++ programmers.  The OWL Sources web site has a
> great selection of OWL code samples and the OWL-HOW web site discusses
> several issues that Borland's online help and documentation gloss over.  I
> suggest that you include links to these websites and don't duplicate their
> content.  Also, surf around Borland's website.  There are a lot of useful
> pages on that site that you could provide links to.  I have links to
> several other useful BC++ websites as well.
> 
> Having done that you might want to have a theme (or several themes) such as
> a newbies page or an OWL page.  I suggest that you stay away from a generic
> C++ page since there are enough tutorials, web sites, and newsgroups that
> cover this topic already. ....

Let's presume that most questions are already answered somewhere in the
net. Then why not start with just a pure 'index web site' and check
whether that's enough or not? You can always fill the gaps later on.

J�rg