[Typo3-typo3org] documentation.typo3.org

[Jan-Hendrik Heuing [NF]]

>> I just can't believe that a discussion like this comes up while having 
>> typo3 doing rich text editing and all sorts of things. Why having a 
>> CONTENT MANAGEMENT system which we do not use for documentation?
>
> Because I am not convinced that this is as easy: Do you want all extension 
> authors to have BE access (which is basically required for RTE editing 
> until now)?

Well, I haven't tested timtaw yet, but as it is being called a 
wiki-extension, I guess it could do the job without too much backend access! 
Sebastian / Rob?

Of course it doesn't make sense adding all users as backend users, I would 
not do so as well!

>> Beside this being bad advertising, I suggest to more think about how to 
>> transfer timtaw-content to docbook or something the like!
> If we want pure client-side documentation writing, exports are not too 
> difficult. But the problem is that people want BOTH offline and online 
> editing capabilities (so it seems), so we have to fully implement oowriter 
> in TYPO3, kinda at least.

Sure, I'd like that too ;) But seriously: Having both ways and you can 
choose either way for your documentation sounds like a good idea, but of 
course you need to stick to the one way in this case as soon as you started. 
Otherwise I see the conflicts you point out.

> It seems like we are having the same goals as those people asking on the 
> lists how they can manage a website with TYPO3 by just uploading doc-files 
> written by their users... This stinks because TYPO3 is a WEB CMS.

http://www.trisenx.com/product.html
Related to cohiba or no-cigar extensions, it could produce a good or bad 
smelly atmosphere.. Sounds like a good idea to me ;)

JH