Documentation?

[Patrick O'Donnell]

>From: "Patrick O'Donnell" <pao at ascent.com>
>>From: Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>
>>Patrick O'Donnell wrote:
>>> I have made similar queries on this list for
>>> documentation, with similar lack of results.
>>
>>IOW, you ask, people answer, you don't like the answer (probably
>>because you didn't ask the right question in the first place), then
>>claim that no-one answered.
>
>IOW, I ask, people answer a different question, and they blame me for
>not asking the question they wanted to answer in the first place.
>Then, they claim the answered my question.  Hmmmm....

On re-reading, I realize that this is unfair to those who did answer
and offered their help, and to those who might have been offended, I
apologize.  I should not have succumbed to the temptation to respond
to a provocation that was not deserving of a response.

It is unfortunate that the same lack of funds/time that preclude
comprehensive documentation of the latest in advancements in X also
precludes many of us who might want to from sussing out what we need
from the implementation details that are avaiable.  It's a catch-22
that makes it difficult to effectively and efficiently update old X
applications that need it.

The lack of comprehensive documentation also precludes one without the
time to pursue in-depth understanding of the details of recent X
developments from developing the ability to know if the question they
ask is the "right" one.  Nevertheless, the asking of a question, even
the wrong one, indicates a void in the asker's understanding that they
wish to fill.  Dismissing the asker simply because their void is
larger than they realized is a great way to turn away a potential
advocate, or to lose one who once was an advocate but is becoming
disillusioned.

		- Patrick