comment on

I agree that perldoc feedback is a good thing, but I'm not sure that a formal framework is necessary. If I find an error or some slight ambiguity in the documentation of a module, I email the author or put a bug report on the bug tracker. But if a module's documentation just stinks in the first place and shows little concern for the needs of users, it doesn't make me very hopeful that a documentation review is going to make any difference unless I'm actually sending a full patch for the pod.

(Maybe some authors hope that other people will like the module so much that they'll document it for him/her. That might explain the proliferation of real documentation showing up on wikis for several major frameworks. But I don't think that's very good practice if its intentional.)

-xdg

Code written by xdg and posted on PerlMonks is public domain. It is provided as is with no warranties, express or implied, of any kind. Posted code may not have been tested. Use of posted code is at your own risk.

In reply to Re: Perldocs and peer reviews by xdg
in thread Perldocs and peer reviews by g0n

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses
	PerlMonks