[Fwd: Re: Official book content in Dapper]

[Jane Silber]

Hi folks -
>>     
> Jerome,
>
> I think what Matt and I are more concerned about the lack of prior notice
> this was going to happen, the duplication of efforts placed into the
> desktop guides and also the fact that this will not be translatted like
> the rest of the docs.
> Also the documents created by the doc team now seems a little less
> official.  Look at the docs created by the "community driven documentation
> team" versus find it in the Official Cannocial support book
>
>
>   
This absolutely wasn't the intention and I'm sure we can find a solution
that doesn't give that impression.  The inclusion of the book content is
meant to be a bonus for users, add value to user experience and a
testament to the value of open content.  I think the Desktop Guide
(which is meant to be online documentation) and the book content (which
isn't really)  are different, with different audiences.  In no way is
the book meant to replace the existing documentation.

I understand the issues surrounding the access to this content and the
sensitivity of the word "official". That is the name of the book itself,
but we could limit the use of the word "official" to where it is clearly
part of the book title, and not used in a general adjectival sense. 
Perhaps you guys can suggest how the content should reasonably be
packaged/labeled, without the connotation that part is official and part
isn't?

Thanks,
Jane