- the help patches are not easily searcheable and 2) you can only
search for objects that are on your computer, but what if you search for an object that has a certain feature and is maybe in a library that you don't have yet. 3) pd patches cannot have meta information. it is more difficult to script into them and get information out of them than it is from websites. 4) history showed, that almost noone ever changed a helppatch and reposted it to the repository. at least not the majority of users, with a web based solution this will be much easier. 5) you can have links, images, videos, better structure in wikipedia than in pd. - you can not have the interaction feeling you have in pd, though. therefore the help patches will be the first reference. marius.
Steffen wrote:
On 06/09/2007, at 10.54, JNM wrote:
ild0012 wrote:
why pdpedia is needed ?
As a primo-supporter of the idea in France, let me try to explain. There are main reasons: (snip)
There a a lot of good ideas there - agreed. Just got a^Htwo questions.
Why can't those issues be solved by using *-help.pd files (or
allabout-*.pd files if needed be) as how the PDDP tried to do it? -
As i see it, the only (but very likely very important) new this is
the multilingual issue, which i don't see why couldn't be solved
in .pd doman.If the real problem is, that people (that write good documentation)
can't be asked to submit edited versions of existing (or non
existing) help files to the PDDP cvs folder, then maybe a easier way
to submit would solve the problem?
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list