<para>Alternatively, if you've obtained the file from the Review Coordinator, or are unfamiliar with CVS, you can return the changes to the coordinator for further handling.</para>
</footnote>
and make any necessary changes. If changes are
extensive or if the document has glaringly and fundamentally fatal errors, contact a
<sect2id="newversion"><title>Working With the Latest Version</title>
<para>Make sure the copy you are reviewing is the most current.</para>
<para>If your document includes a URL to an official homepage, visit that page and see if it
displays the same version number. If you find the same version number, you are fine. If you
find a newer version number, write to the author and ask him or her to please submit the newer
version to you.</para>
</sect2>
<sect2id="pickatype"><title>Picking a Review to Conduct</title>
<para>There are many different ways a document can be reviewed, and you may have the skills
to do only one or two types of reviews. It is sometimes useful (and easier) to do each review as a
separate pass through the document; Your Mileage May Vary.</para>
<para>The following sections explain the various types of reviews we are conducting. Use these sections as a guide to help you choose
the type of review to conduct and to help you conduct the review itself. Again, when you post your review
choice to the review list, please specify the type of review you would like to be responsible for.</para>
</sect2>
</sect1>
<sect1id="peerreview"><title>Peer Review</title>
<para>When an author submits a new document to the LDP, someone monitoring the submission email list will advise the author to post his draft to the discussion list for an initial peer review, prior to publication. Besides determining whether the document thoroughly covers the subject matter, peers may also point out similar work already in the document collection, in which case the new author might want to contact the maintainer of the existing work.</para>
<para>As a member of the review team, you will recognize a peer review document as one the author has submitted to the discussion list, specifically requesting feedback for inclusion of their HOWTO in the collection. This review can be performed by anyone subscribed to the discussion list (<ulinkurl="www.tldp.org/mailinfo.html#maillists"/>).</para>
<para>Make sure the facts as stated in the document are correct, helpful, and on topic.</para>
<para>To do a technical accuracy review, you really need to know your subject matter,
probably as well or better than the original author. Use whatever other documentation is
available for your subject, including man pages, program documentation, other printed
books, etc. You might also use mailing lists on the topic, asking for third parties to
verify certain facts of which you are in doubt.</para>
<para>When doing this type of review, consider if the information is only valid for certain types
of hardware or software. If this is the case, make sure to note the limitations of the document within
the document, either within the abstract or as a note at the beginning of the document. For example, if the
solutions in the document only are relevant for one type or brand of hardware, make sure that that
limitation is defined. This will keep readers from trying to apply a certain type of technology to an application or
situation where it will not work. </para>
<para>The same should apply for the prerequisite knowledge of the reader. If prior knowledge of a subject is assumed or required, the author should say so somewhere at the beginning of the document, and it's helpful to ask that authors provide a Resource section for further reading, to bring readers that much closer to the required information.</para>
</sect1>
<sect1id="metadatareview"><title>Metadata and Markup Review</title>
<para>The LDP uses a series of scripts to transform documents into their published format. In order for these scripts to work, documents must use valid markup and include specific metadata. Metadata is information about the document and includes author information, copyright, license and a revision history of the document.</para>
<para>At this time Metadata and Markup Reviews will be conducted by
one of the Review Coordinators and will be the final of the three
reviews for new documents. Upon successful completion of a Metadata
and Markup Review, the Review Coordinator will update the document's
version number to 1.0 and submit the document for publication in the
<para>The following elements are all required:</para>
<itemizedlist>
<listitem><formalpara><title><sgmltag>articleinfo</sgmltag> or <sgmltag>bookinfo</sgmltag></title>
<para>If you are writing a shorter HOWTO (this will be most documents) you will need to use an <sgmltag>articleinfo</sgmltag>, if you are writing a longer guide you will need to use <sgmltag>bookinfo</sgmltag>.</para></formalpara>
<para>Every document must contain a short, descriptive title. It should be reasonably unique; check other documents in the collection to make sure your document's title is distinctive from all other documents. Although it is not required, most <quote>HOWTO</quote> documents contain the word <quote>HOWTO</quote> in the title.</para></formalpara>
<para>A short description of your document must be included in the <sgmltag>abstract</sgmltag>. This description is typically one or two sentences in length.
<para>Every document must have an author. If there are multiple authors, you may use <sgmltag>authorgroup</sgmltag>. If the document was prepared by an organization with no individual author, please use <sgmltag>authorcorp</sgmltag> instead.</para></formalpara>
<para>Every new document must go through the review process and have
a technical, language and metadata/markup review editor listed. In
some cases two of the reviews may have been conducted by the same
person. The name of the editor and the version their review was
conduct on should be included. For more information about this markup, please read the notes in the <citetitle>Author Guide</citetitle>'s <ulinkurl="http://tldp.org/LDP/LDP-Author-Guide/html/metadata-markup.html">Markup for Metadata</ulink>.</para>
<para>The date of publication for the document. The date should be in the ISO standard of YYYY-MM-DD.</para></formalpara></listitem>
<listitem><formalpara><title>copyright</title>
<para>Authors will always retain the copyright to any documents they submit to the LDP. Although it is not required, a copyright notice may be included. A license, however, is always required.</para></formalpara>
</listitem>
<listitem><formalpara><title>Revision history (<sgmltag>revhistory</sgmltag>)</title>
<para>A summary of revisions should be included in the document. For more information about their markup, please read the notes in the <citetitle>Author Guide</citetitle>'s <ulinkurl="http://tldp.org/LDP/LDP-Author-Guide/html/metadata-markup.html">Markup for Metadata</ulink>.</para></formalpara>
<para>The initial release of a document should be marked up as Version 1.0. Subsequent updates should increment the version number appropriately. The preferred format is Major.Minor.Bugfix, where each section is an integer.
Some authors use Alan Cox style versions (for example 1.4pre-3) and some include
additional information (for example 1.3beta). This is acceptable but not encouraged.
The most important thing is that we <emphasis>have</emphasis> a version
number so we know which version we are dealing with! Once a document goes through review it should
advance in minor or bugfix version number, depending on the amount of change introduced.</para>
</listitem>
<listitem><formalpara><title>License and Legal Notice</title>
<para>A license is required. The LDP currently accepts documents which are licensed under the GFDL, Creative Commons License and the LDP License. If you are using a license that is not listed it will need to be reviewed by our volunteers before the document is accepted. The full text of the license is required. A link is not sufficient. You may wish to include a disclaimer as part of the legal notice. A standard disclaimer is available from the <citetitle>Author Guide</citetitle>.</para></formalpara>
</listitem>
<listitem>
<formalpara><title>email</title>
<para>The LDP must be able to reach any author of any document via email. Email addresses should be included in the <sgmltag>author</sgmltag> tag, but may be included in the DocBook source as a comment. Documents without email address will not be accepted into the collection. If the LDP is unable to reach an author, the document may be removed from the collection.</para></formalpara>
</listitem>
<listitem><formalpara><title>Acknowledgements and Other Credits</title>
<para>Very few, if any, documents are written only by one person. It is good form to thank those who helped you with either the writing, research, testing or reviewing of your document. If someone added markup, or translated your document to another language they should also be given credit.</para></formalpara>