Jim

>I think that simply pushing for interim releases of the docs will not really accomplish much, unless it is accompanied by some easy way to communicate observed errors/omissions/confusions.

Somehow, Jim, I *knew* this would be where you went with it. It's easier to criticize endlessly, I guess. Look, the criticism is the docs aren't as complete as we'd like them to be. Call me simple-minded, but it would seem the first order of business would be to update the docs. Communicating that changes have been made could be 1) a logical absurdity (how much time do they spending communicated what changed vs. changing the docs) 2) the same process as communicating what's changed in the product upgrades (seems to be an already working model).

>What is clearly needed, in my humble opinion, is for someone who is VFP knowledgeable (modern VFP, not FP or VFP3) to proofread and correct the documentation. I am also assuming that it is understood that anyone acting as a proofreader would be attentive to the smallest detail. [that person might also be able to apply the changes outlined in the UT VFP8 wish document < s >] Interim release publication at points during this process would surely be helpful.

Okay, there again is the implicit assertion that MS has substandard staff with questionable qualifications working on a project. What makes you think that VFP-knowledgeable people haven't been reading the docs? And, it also seems to avoid the issue that documentation is a profession all it's own. They do somehow manage to get technical docs done. The docs aren't _that_ bad. Crikey, or we wouldn't be able to use them at all.

>A few things, just off the top of my head, that I have found in perusing the new docs so far:

Did you file bug reports? How the heck do we file bug reports, anyway?

>I know that I have found at least 10 more. Too bad that the display mechanism doesn't allow for annotation, 'cuase then I could make notes and they would be easier to (re)find.

Annotations would be nice. Agreed. That doesn't share your knowledge, and you'd lose the notes in an upgrade. Have you thought of starting (maybe it's already there) a Wiki topic on Doc errata and corrections?