WML Reference update for 1.4 stable

Discussion of all aspects of the website, wiki, and forums, including assistance requests and new ideas for them.

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Post Reply
Rhuvaen
Inactive Developer
Posts: 1272
Joined: August 27th, 2004, 8:05 am
Location: Berlin, Germany

WML Reference update for 1.4 stable

Post by Rhuvaen »

As the 1.4 stable release is drawing near, I am wondering how the WML Reference (including the "Create" Pages related to WML) will make the transition.

Currently the reference includes information for both 1.2 and 1.3+, and most of the examples are related to the old version. Some of the more modern features of WML could use some more introduction. And probably, we wouldn't want to have references to no longer working 1.2-isms in the documentation for the upcoming version.

I would like to work on the documentation somewhat, and encourage others to do so as well, but I'm not quite clear on how this transition is best handled. Do we:

a) Just edit the existing pages, and try to extract 1.2 related references into a separate page for obsolete wml

b) Just edit the existing pages, not bothering about references to obsolete version wml (removing them)

c) Copy the existing pages into an obsolete part, and one copy that gets updated

:?:

Suggestions?
User avatar
zookeeper
WML Wizard
Posts: 9742
Joined: September 11th, 2004, 10:40 pm
Location: Finland

Post by zookeeper »

If possible, someone with access to the database itself could make a snapshot of the current wiki (just an archive with all the pages in it as files or something) and that'd do just fine as far as documenting old/1.2 WML is needed. Of course all old versions of the pages are still accessible in the wiki itself, so I'm not sure if it'd be all that useful to have a separate version or archive of the old content. As long as the wiki itself is regularly backupped properly, of course...

I'd suggest wiping {{DevFeature}}s and other 1.2-specific stuff away and doing whatever else cleanups we might want to do when we get to the release candidate phase (the next release after 1.3.16 probably?). a) sounds like a waste of time and c) sounds really messy. I'm all for b), I don't think we should try to manually maintain any 1.2 documentation like that.
Post Reply