Glaring issue with Help Documentation

> yikes, I didn't intend to spark a backyard brawl.

oops, didn't mean to come across like that :) I just felt that the poster
(adobe community expert) was missing the point somewhat.

>. Will turn to third party tutorials now.

Sure, local docs are not to be trusted and could potentially confuse!

"manhattanmediaworks" <webforumsuser@macromedia.com> wrote in message
news:e6rovi$76u$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> yikes, I didn't intend to spark a backyard brawl. you all offer good
points.
>
> Bottom line is, as Danny says, it is totally inexcusable to have glaring
> errors in the real documentation and not have that fixed in updaters to
either
> the help or the application itself. I was appalled to see that the issue
(both
> the one that I documented and the fact that the lessons subsequently lead
to
> errors when followed exactly according to the docs.) was not addressed in
the
> 7.0.01 updater.
>
> As Danny says, the live docs are a neat idea but there is no excuse for
not
> adequately reviewing the real documentation before it ships with the
product.
> As a newbie to ColdFusion it doesn't sit well when the lessons on the
basics
> actually LEAD TO ERRORS. Will turn to third party tutorials now.
>
>
>

yikes, I didn't intend to spark a backyard brawl. you all offer good points.

Bottom line is, as Danny says, it is totally inexcusable to have glaring errors in the real documentation and not have that fixed in updaters to either the help or the application itself. I was appalled to see that the issue (both the one that I documented and the fact that the lessons subsequently lead to errors when followed exactly according to the docs.) was not addressed in the 7.0.01 updater.

As Danny says, the live docs are a neat idea but there is no excuse for not adequately reviewing the real documentation before it ships with the product. As a newbie to ColdFusion it doesn't sit well when the lessons on the basics actually LEAD TO ERRORS. Will turn to third party tutorials now.

> the live docs are one way used to gather & fix doc bugs. isn't that
obvious?

Yes, quite obvious. Which is why I say:

"Why edit the live docs to correct errors and let future versions of the
software ship with the same mistakes in the local docs?"

> who said they were?

Nobody said they were a replacement, but you seemed to be excusing poor
local docs by saying we had live docs to use. But I think you were leaning
more toward "if they didn't care why would they use live docs to discover
and fix errors". The flaw in that logic being that they don't actually fix
up the local docs in patches or updates or new releases, they just seem to
be satisfied that they have provided the live docs as an alternate 'working'
version of the incorrect local docs.




"PaulH **AdobeCommunityExpert**" <paul@sustainableGIS.com> wrote in message
news:e6qqml$sun$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> DannyBoy wrote:
> >>> yes they do actually.
> >
> > No, the do not, actually. Live Docs are not a replacement for local docs
and
>
> who said they were?
>
> > BOTH should be maintained. Why edit the live docs to correct errors and
let
> > future versions of the software ship with the same mistakes in the local
> > docs?
>
> the live docs are one way used to gather & fix doc bugs. isn't that
obvious?
>

DannyBoy wrote:
>>> yes they do actually.
>
> No, the do not, actually. Live Docs are not a replacement for local docs and

who said they were?

> BOTH should be maintained. Why edit the live docs to correct errors and let
> future versions of the software ship with the same mistakes in the local
> docs?

the live docs are one way used to gather & fix doc bugs. isn't that obvious?

>> yes they do actually.

No, the do not, actually. Live Docs are not a replacement for local docs and
BOTH should be maintained. Why edit the live docs to correct errors and let
future versions of the software ship with the same mistakes in the local
docs?

As the other poster says, take the local docs with a grain of salt as they
are not reliable. Use live docs when possible.


"PaulH **AdobeCommunityExpert**" <paul@sustainableGIS.com> wrote in message
news:e6pqd1$meb$1@forums.macromedia.com...
> SafariTECH wrote:
> > There are a lot of errors in the help docs, so take some of the info
> > with a grain of salt. Adobe/MM doesn't seem concerned with updating
> > their installers or help information.
>
> yes they do actually. else why bother w/having livedocs? if you see doc
> bugs, report them.

SafariTECH wrote:
> There are a lot of errors in the help docs, so take some of the info
> with a grain of salt. Adobe/MM doesn't seem concerned with updating
> their installers or help information.

yes they do actually. else why bother w/having livedocs? if you see doc
bugs, report them.

There are a lot of errors in the help docs and examples, so take some of the info with a grain of salt. Adobe/MM doesn't seem concerned with updating their installers or help information.