[Bf-docboard] Blender Proceedings

[Willie Pierce]

Will you post links to your blender channel

On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Roger Wickes <me at rogerwickes.com> wrote:

> Sorry to have caused some ill will between people. But sticking to the
> facts,,,Regarding video, having authored hundreds of tutorial videos
> available
> for subscription and for free, and having watched tons, they can be good,
> but
> they can be bad and annoying, depending on how they are done, and what they
> are billed as versus what they actually deliver.
>
> Video is knowledge encapsulated in a moving visual form. That knowledge
> could
> be flawed and that is the disadvantage, since the user community cannot
> annotate or correct. However, it is powerful and plays a big part in the
> future. The knowledge management plan must speak to this and set up a
> framework whereby we:
>        1. Identify the video that it even exists. There are thousands. It's
> too
> much for even two people to maintain a list. it needs to be crowdsourced.
>        2. attribute the content of the video by audience and subject matter
> and
> blender version and whether it has audio and if so in which language, and
> whether it is free or if it costs or if it is packaged on a DVD somewhere
> and
> where it can be found or ordered.
>        2a. Allow the community to either assign attributes (distribute the
> work)
> and grade it
>        3. Provide a search engine so people can find knowledge, video
> specifically, by attribute, within this knowledge domain. "beginner spanish
> animation video". The search engine could be something hosted locally, or
> be a
> BoF kind of google/aggregator. for example, right now we have YouTube.
> doing
> the above query prefixed by "Blender tutorial" on youtube returned about 10
> results and referrals to 100 more. Video Aulas este es muy `util.
>
> >
> >    1. Videos would dominate life in future, and overtake the written
> >    instructions (wiki/pdf).
> >    So we better plan for this medium.
> >
> >    It can easily be hosted on Youtube etc., by having a *Blender
> channel*,
> >    (bidirectional links between Blender wiki and Youtube).
> >
> Blender Foundation has a YouTube channel, www.youtube.com/BenderFoundation.
> It
> is awesome and growing by the day. So does David Ward, so do I.
>
> The wiki fully supports hosted video. Mindrones or maybe it was martin
> wrote
> us a nice little plugin. See my mocap tutorial as example of how the wiki
> can
> embed video quite nicely. Almost any other content engine can as well.
>
> >    2. About translations, my point was, we cannot plan for translations
> > with just 3 people.
> >    However, in wiki, we would not be blocking anyone from translating an
> >    existing page.
>
> We can and do and must plan for foreign language translations, and
> facilitate
> them in a non-blocking manner.
>
> >    5. I do not see how the "wiki" and "sandbox" concepts mix.
>
> Wiki authors should use Sandbox as a temporary pre-release place for them
> to
> complete a logical unit of work, before moving it into production. We
> should
> not put half-baked garbage/outlines into the wiki, but as an author, I need
> a
> place to put my notes and outlines so that I can work on it from time to
> time.
>
> Our tools must support this concept that writing or documenting some
> knowledge
> may not be able to be accomplished all in one sitting by one person. The
> tools
> must support a person working over time, building and refining knowledge
> until
> it is ready for prime time. There must be at least a  "development" and a
> "production" space for knowledge authors. It would be nice if it the tool
> supported a "testing" status, where the author wrote what they thought, but
> would like someone else to check their work. When you write a book, you
> have a
> technical editor that checks your work. They catch stuff before the book
> goes
> final. It's a good process, and our tool should support this kind of "test"
> space or connotation. An end user can use this knowledge at their peril,
> but
> should have comfort in knowing that "production" knowledge is good and
> accurate for the version it documents.
>
> regarding ideas and coordinating multiple people; I put in place the wiki
> user
> manual To Do list. I even documented the process and used the status
> templates. See the wiki for how it is supposed to work; basically a manual
> ticket system. Anyone can add items to be documented, anyone can grab an
> item
> and fix it directly, or make an edit and ask someone to check their work.
> It
> never caught on as a work management system; perhaps because it was manual
> or
> required you to be a wiki author or whatever. But, imho, Basically,
> identifying bugs and defects and missing knowledge should be crowdsourced
> into
> a bug-tracking system. We should allow the community to identify what
> knowledge it needs through some tool or system.
>
> Then the community of authors should be able to grab items they want to
> work
> on, and then close the bug when they commit the change...just like
> software.
> Right now, the blender code base is not managed that way for very good
> reason,
> but we do not need the same types of controls over knowledge content.....or
> do
> we? The plan needs to address the type and level of control over knowledge,
> and the knowledge acquistion process, and the maintenance process and
> workflow
> and specific tool use to support the process.
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-docboard mailing list
> Bf-docboard at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-docboard
>



-- 
Current theme song
I hope you die
Bloodhound gang

Willie Pierce
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-docboard/attachments/20101113/68150565/attachment-0001.htm