reblog

ben, i agree that if you remove the "web" bit of "web based office suite" and just have nice revisioning and transparent server-side storage as an option, then you could have something that was great. but you know how many "oh my god! word processing and spreadsheets in my web browser! ajax to the rescue! *cream*" articles i've read in the last 2 weeks? the web browser is not and never will be the platform for such apps and i decided to pretend i was david letterman for a bit. ;)

and wow, tuxipuxi, who shit in your cereal? go take a look at most other open source projects for documentation and then come back to this conversation.

now what you and i were talking about are fairly different animals. note that i talked about API documentation. higher level documentation (e.g. "what are these sets of classes for") supports that and we certainly don't have enough of it right now. if you've read my previous blog entries or read my emails on the matter to kde-core-devel, you'll know exactly where i stand on the issue: we need high level documentation that covers comprehensively what we have to offer.

so we're not in disagreement on that matter.

but to say to all the people who have written API documentation, and there is a ton of that available for KDE, as well as to those that have written what higher-level docu we do have that they've failed utterly and miserably is pretty lame imho.

you did mention qt has better documentation, and that's very true. since kde is based on qt, we actually benefit from that. in fact, i consider qt's good documentation coverage a huge asset in its favour and, in turn, in ours.

so, are you planning on going on a documentation writing binge? or was that just a documentation writing "whinge"? ;)