Yes, there are may fruitful pages in ConTeXt wiki. But all wiki resources have the same problem: If you know what you are looking for, it's helpful. If not, it would be a time hole. And I was told that MkIV progresses so fast that many things in the current manuals are out of date. I don't know which manual I should stick with. To make thing worse, there are so many places containing ConTeXt tutorials and manuals(see the following list). - wiki.contextgarden.net - http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextman/ - http://context.aanhet.net/svn/contextman/ - http://www.pragma-ade.com/dir?path= Those materials are scattered, overlapped and not complete. It makes new users, like me, don't know what to read. If all those materials are put in only one place and companying with two and only two complete manuals, one for developer and one for user, it would be time saving for both users and developers. Then the next time when I meet command like '\??pb', I could look for it in manuals first, then wiki probably, then mail list. If I don't find answer in those three places, I would know the command is not documented then I could ask in the mail list without hesitating and worrying about wasting other people's time. To Taco: My emails don't mean any offense to you. You give me lots of help. I really appreciate it. To Alan: Thanks, your proverbs are very inspiriting. To Xan and Corin: Thanks for your understanding. Best wishes, Wei-Wei Corin Royal Drummond 写道:
In terms of process, I think someone to comb the list archives for common problems and solutions, and wikify them would get the most bang for the buck initially. These wiki entries could later be ConTeXtified into printed (and screen) docs, like Hans' awesome old manuals. Honestly, we've got smart people wasting time answering the same questions in different ways on the list, when they could be plugging in some of that time into writing docs for everyone. And as useful as the list is, it's no substitute for manuals.