Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: "waldschrotts guide to nifty references" - manual page draft, version 0.9b From: Zeev Suraski (zeev <email protected>)
Date: 08/20/00

At 23:46 20/08/2000, eschmid+sic <email protected> wrote:
>We don't have two lines of people. We have two editors. And one of the
>editors believes that the manual should be as complete as in every book
>you can buy now.

Uhm, the manual isn't nobody's personal toy, and the editor role in that
sense is technical, not 'strategic'.
I really see no point in the manual competing with the books. If you try
to be everything, you end up doing a poor job. I'd concentrate at having a
good reference manual (and by design and layout, it is a reference manual,
rather than a book that tries to teach you what PHP is), without making
strict rules as to what should go in and what shouldn't. The loose
guideline should be that things that are beyond descriptions of what a
certain feature or function does should not be in the manual. People can
add examples in the annotations, but I don't see in-depth discussions or
tutorials as things that belong in that manual.

Zeev 

--
Zeev Suraski   <zeev <email protected>>
http://www.zend.com/

-- 
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: php-dev-unsubscribe <email protected>
For additional commands, e-mail: php-dev-help <email protected>
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: php-list-admin <email protected>