Re: The PDF generator on the toolserver has implications for quality control on a per-chapter basis

mike.lifeguard wrote:
> @Adam:
> HTMLDOC is the basis for the toolserver PDF generator, I think. Thanks for
> the recommendation on Scribus as well; I'll be looking into that.
>
> @Everyone:
> I do recognize that this has (big) limitations; that's why I think it's
> place (for now) is a)allow easy "stable versions" (Andrew got it right;
> also, keep in mind that these are just as easy to update) until we get some
> consistent system we like in the software but b)not replace hand-done work
> for creating a publishable PDF book. These *are* rough drafts, and aren't
> meant to be sent to the printer. Instead this tool is a middle ground
> between having only a (potentially) unstable version on-wiki and taking lots
> of time and effort to make a publishable PDF book. Reducing the effort
> threshold for PDF creation will probably make our books more usable.
> -Mike
>
>   

I make this distinction about the rough drafts mainly because whenever I 
see a suggestion to automate PDF files, there is a presumption that 
somehow you can take an edit you just put in 30 seconds ago and somehow 
have it show up "magically" in a textbook that can be printed by simply 
pressing a "print book" button somewhere.  Or to completely ignore the 
problems of trying to format HTML into something that can be rendered 
into a PDF version of the book.

As far as quality control is concerned, I'd love to see something akin 
to a "published page" tab and "revised" or "draft" page that could be 
edited, with some sort of admin-type tool that could be used to select a 
specific version of the page edits to be noted as the "published page" 
that could be used by casual readers to the wiki.  The decision for what 
page would actually be selected is something to be decided by the 
participants of that page.  I don't believe this would take too much 
additional programming in terms of adding the extension to MediaWiki, 
and it would only require the creation of one additional and smallish 
table to keep track of: what the current "published version" of the page 
is at the moment.  It might even help with caching issues as the 
published version would be the one to cache, not necessarily the one 
with the latest edit.  Just a thought here, and something on my personal 
wish list of future Wiki tools I'd love to see.


-- Robert Horning