> Whether you write directly into a wiki or produce DocBook XML which

is later rendered to HMTL and PDF doesn't make a hell of a lot of a
difference.

Let's see about that (writing your first sentence): read 4 docs, get
the "sources" via cvs, get the "tools", the "libs", test-run the
build... I mean are you kidding me??

Now with a wiki, on your bullet-list:
- the organizing of the material, and structuring the document:
already there, just make the corresponding topics and sections and
copy-paste the content. new pages with a click. conflict resolution
with a click (restore older, delete, undelete, etc.)
- checking and double-checking facts: forget about it, let whoever
knows better correct you. debate it aside on the "discussion" page
without adding noise to the topic page, then conclude concisely on the
topic page.
- formulating the narrative, and trying to explain complex subjects:
refactoring too easy to care. let whoever's better at words to say it
better.

Yes, get it up there before it's perfect, before it's even good,
that's the idea.

>
> Still, I'm glad to see that several people are enthusiastic about

the wiki concept and I hope that some of them will become active
contributors. Yes, of course the project could use some fresh blood.
Lots of it!

>

Hear that, "new" faces? Just got the thumbs-up from the big guy of The
Docs. What more could you want? I'm loosing my job here talking, so
like Capt. John H. Miller said just before he died, --Earn this! :)