The problem with most FAQs is focus. The fact that a Q is asked "F" may
point at a documentation deficiency.
Agreed. BTW, we do accept patches to documentation :-) And plain text is fine as a format.
Is it possible to checkout the master of the docuement under change control, like subversion, and make changes and fire it back in. If so, I refreshed a little about change control a couple of days ago, and somewhere over the next week or 3 might get time to do this. I would hack do a single big hack of the document, and submit the lot in one shot, as a suggestion about how I think it should be. You could accept that or roll it all out, I really would not care, but I dont have time to make such a contribution if I know there is no effective infrastructure to slide the suggestions into the real thing.
I would prefer an update to a
install/admin/backup/user guide over the need to scour through a bunch
of FAQs. IMHO, FAQ content should be in the category 'miscellaneous' -
anything else ought to make its way back into the relevant docs.
A better option, IMO, is to add a FAQ section to each chapter of each manual or at the end of each document. That way people go into the document, find what they need, look at the FAQ in that chapter, or whatever.
That sounds like a much better idea. That way any FAQ has at least a chance of being somewhat focussed and organised in the context of any subject area..