struts-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jonathan" <>
Subject Re: *TED* - round 2 of documentation
Date Fri, 06 Jul 2001 13:32:48 GMT
Absolutely not.  The user guide was really well written this time around.
Kudos to Craig and others who wrote it.  I think it should be one of the
first things you read about Struts because it gets you there quick.  I think
it belongs somewhere with the user guide =)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Husted" <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 8:51 AM
Subject: Re: *TED* - round 2 of documentation

> I don't disagree Jonathan. I'm just asking for suggestions as to where
> we should place it in the context of the rest of the documentation.
> Should it be part of the User Guide or something else? If something
> else, what do we call it?
> Unless of course you're proposing that we drop the rest of the User
> Guide and just offer this ;-0
> Jonathan Asbell wrote:
> >
> > Hello Ted.  I gave this documentation to the other developers in my
> > who do not know about Struts, and they said that they now understand
> > Struts is and how to approach using it.  They got lost in the "Struts
> > Components" section because they didnt have a picture to accompany the
> > explanation, and because they were unfamiliar with Struts.  They said
> > the section "How it all works" clarified how Struts behaves.
> >     The point being that the impedance from trying new tools lies in the
> > time necessary to understand and configure it.  Living in New York is
> > because it is the ultimate test for when something is too complicated:
> > People wont take the time to use it.  This type of outline gets would be
> > users/developers started quick.  In a few pages they know what Struts
> > what it needs to run, and how it functions.  Now they can go on,
> > configure and develop with Struts with the user guide and this paper in
> > and feel fairly confident in developing with it.

View raw message