[Bf-docboard] Suggestions to improve wiki useability
Fade
fade_docboard_blender at ymail.com
Sun Jan 13 01:41:01 CET 2013
So I made some test pages with a few of the suggestions people have been
making. I'm aware it's only a few of the possibilities ;-)
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Fade/Doc:2.6/format_test1
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Fade/Doc:2.6/format_test2
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Fade/Doc:2.6/format_test3
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Fade/Doc:2.6/format_test4
One thing I noticed regarding the UI term/options on its own line
suggestion that Jared made below is that it's very dependant on window
width. I tried this on the test3 and test4 pages for the Drawing
Settings section of the Shared Grease Pencil Settings bit. It looks good
when the centre column is reasonably narrow (~1000px wide), but looks
very awkward when viewed fullscreen (1920x1080).
I look the look of test4 the best, but only when the centre column is
narrow. test2 works better for me overall since it reads easier when
the center column is both wide and narrow. I'm in two minds about the
3-column layout at the moment, I like the look but find that I never use
the links on the right and left hand sides. The left hand side is only
useful when you know where you're going (and it's slower than just going
back to the main page). Likewise for the right hand side, I don't think
I've ever clicked on anything there. It's quicker to scan the page for
the headings.
Regarding links: agree on the brighter blue. Plus I'm also in favour of
having the links visibly separate from the text to help them stand out
further.
Lastly, Cal's mentioned the numbers for the headings, but I've never
seen these on the wiki (using Firefox 17.0.1 on Arch Linux). Does anyone
know what the expected behaviour is for mediawiki?
Regards
Fade
On 13/01/13 03:51, Jared Reisweber wrote:
> Here are my suggestions for improved formatting:
>
> * Literals: UI items should be *bold, *or */bold+italic/*). Bold
> stands out better than /italic /alone
> * Links: brighter blue to help them stand out
> * Indent text/headings under ==heading 2== to better separate sections.
> * Increase size of ==heading 2== to make it more separate from
> ===heading 3===
> * Add a bar/background color to headings ?
>
> Recommendations for consistent formatting:
>
> * One =heading 1= per page, as recommended in the Mediawiki
> documentation
> * Describe UI items/options with a clear separation between the word
> and the description
> o Term on its own line, and the decsriptions on next line, indented
> o _Not bulleted_. Visually interferes with the word itself, and
> is consistent with most of the manual and other manuals
> * Bullets are only for examples/lists of things
> * Numbered lists for explanation of steps
> * Omit unnecessary sub-headings, like ==Description==. (It should be
> assumed that what is written is a description).
>
>
> I did a quick mock up a page style idea. SImple, but I think
> effective. Open to feedback:
> http://www.artofjared.com/content/wikiFormatting.html
>
> To answer your question Cal, I felt that it was maybe too simplified.
> I think removing unnecessary sub-headings is good, but not all of
> them, Also, I think UI items should remain formatted. I have mixed
> feelings about boxes/RefBoxes. They are ugly, but do serve an
> important function. Maybe they could be reworked into something better
> looking, but not removed. I agree that simplification is good, but we
> shouldn't over simplify.
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Fade <fade_docboard_blender at ymail.com
> <mailto:fade_docboard_blender at ymail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Docboard,
>
> Apologies for the delay. I've been out of state on holidays for
> the last few days and have only just checked my mail.
>
> Cal: I'm going to be working on the Sketching/Drawing page for the
> next few hours so what I'll do is merge your work and mine into
> what I've done so far at the below link. I'll let you know when
> I'm done and then we can see if anything else needs to be added
> and we can add in Jim's comments from your work.
>
> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Fade/Doc:2.6/Manual/3D_interaction/Sketching/Drawing
>
> Apologies too as I forgot to put a note on the Drawing page that I
> was going to propose merging the Sketching/Drawing pages together
> (I have done the page to reflect this).
>
> I'm happy to help with a formatting/layout review. To kick it off,
> once I've finished the Sketching/Drawing page today, I'll
> duplicate it a few times and use it as a test for some
> layout/formatting tests as there's enough elements in there to
> have a bit of a play with. I'll post back in a day or so with the
> links and some thoughts.
>
> Regards
> Fade
>
>
> On 11/01/13 12:05, Cal McGaugh wrote:
>> Hi Keston,
>> As I began to look closely at the current pages that Jim
>> assigned me to edit (Sketching) , I realized why I hadn't been
>> using the
>> wiki more in the past.....I find the current formatting very
>> distracting, and difficult to extract & understand
>> the relevant info of the page.
>> So I took the liberty to remove most of the template code to see
>> how it would look.
>> e.g. "Description", "Options", "Usage" etc, the in-line button
>> images, numbering each heading (1.2.1.2 etc),
>> and the large darker boxes (at least in the Naiad skin version).
>> They are un-necessary, and in fact, counter-productive to
>> useability, imho.
>> I showed this to Jim Tucker and he seemed to think it was an
>> improvement.
>> Here is the current version of this page using templates
>> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Doc:2.6/Manual/3D_interaction/Sketching/Drawing
>>
>> And this is the one that I edited by removing most of the templates.
>> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Megacal
>> I kept the relevant headings with their font size & bolding, also
>> bulleted points. The rest was redundant and distracting......at
>> least for me, and
>> I think for many others as well.
>> Not only would it make the pages easier to use, it makes it
>> easier to create & edit if we aren't constrained to use
>> the templates. This does not mean that pages would become
>> inconsistant.....the style should always be consistant.
>> "The main purpose of wiki maintenance is to ensure that the
>> content of each page provides the user with a clear,
>> concise and up-to-date description of the Blender function in the
>> current version. Over and above this, the page
>> should conform with the User Manual context (see below) so that
>> we keep a uniform User Manual layout." ....should always be the
>> standard.
>> I'd also like to propose doing a user poll at Blenderartists.org
>> (if you think it would be productive and help to improve
>> useability) to ask if:
>>
>> * Do you use the wiki?
>> * How often % vs videos and/or books?
>> * Do you have any suggestions for improving it so you would use
>> it more?
>> * What do you think of this page vs this page? (the current
>> version vs my proposed version).
>>
>> BTW, I didn't realize until after I had started the editing that
>> Fade had already started working on the Sketching pages.......I
>> tried to contact him/her to see if they wanted to finish
>> alone, with my help, or would want me to finish the pages....no
>> reply , so am not publishing the pages yet, though did submit it
>> to Jim for review.
>> There's a good primer on website useability, Don't Make Me Think
>> <http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Make-Me-Think-Usability/dp/0321344758/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1357869508&sr=8-1&keywords=book+don%27t+make+me+think>,
>> and I believe the same idea makes sense for the wiki, too.
>> I was going to post this at the doc-board, but wanted to get your
>> Ok first. It may have even already been proposed years
>> ago.....I'm still wet behind the ears here & in Blender.
>> If you do think it's worth pursuing, I'd even be willing to limit
>> my editing to cleaning up all the current pages.......it would be
>> a good project to keep me off the streets. =)
>> Whatever you think is best, I'll abide with it.
>> Thanks,
>> Cal
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-docboard mailing list
>> Bf-docboard at blender.org <mailto:Bf-docboard at blender.org>
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-docboard
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-docboard mailing list
> Bf-docboard at blender.org <mailto:Bf-docboard at blender.org>
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-docboard
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-docboard mailing list
> Bf-docboard at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-docboard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-docboard/attachments/20130113/2217a92b/attachment.htm
More information about the Bf-docboard
mailing list