<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"/>
<style type="text/css">.mceResizeHandle {position: absolute;border: 1px solid black;background: #FFF;width: 5px;height: 5px;z-index: 10000}.mceResizeHandle:hover {background: #000}img[data-mce-selected] {outline: 1px solid black}img.mceClonedResizable, table.mceClonedResizable {position: absolute;outline: 1px dashed black;opacity: .5;z-index: 10000}
</style></head><body style="">
<p>1/26/2013</p>
<p>To: bf-docboard</p>
<p>Results of survey/poll <br/>http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?278419-Why-do-you-NOT-use-Blender-Wiki</p>
<p><br/>Hi all, <br/>sorry did not have time to make this prettier with proper formatting, but hope<br/>it will still be useful information even if based on a small sample (~25 users).</p>
<p>All the replies have been compiled into four categories according to the questions.</p>
<p>Hope to have a productive IRC meeting later this morning with everyone.  </p>
<p><span style="font-size: 9pt;">Cheers, </span></p>
<p>Cal McGaugh<br/>www.blenderportal.com</p>
<p> </p>
<p><br/>1. How often do you use Blender Wiki?</p>
<p>I use Wiki each day, especially when I'm doing some demanding projects in Blender.<br/>Rarely<br/>Every day. Lot of wrong things there but, every day<br/>Monthly<br/>1-2x per week<br/>Rarely<br/>Almost never, but would like to <br/>Not often, but used it when beginning<br/>Rarely <1/mo<br/>Rarely<br/>1x/mo<br/>>=1/week<br/><weekly, >rarely<br/>Daily<br/>Few x/mo<br/>Few x/wk<br/>Rarely<br/>Rarely<br/>Rarely<br/>Rarely<br/>Rarely<br/>Weekly<br/>Weekly<br/>Almost never</p>
<p> </p>
<p>2. What is your first resource for learning Blender?</p>
<p>Videos, Wiki<br/>Videos<br/>google, probably forum results<br/>Videos and browsing the forum here<br/> Video tutorials.<br/>Videos<br/>videos for use cases and techniques and release logs for exploring new stuff<br/>Videos and this forum.<br/>Google, Wiki<br/>Google<br/>Videos<br/>mostly video tutorials, sometimes the wiki.<br/>Videos and wiki<br/>Videos, wiki<br/>Wiki Videos 50/50<br/>Wiki, videos, and books. In that order<br/>the wiki for control explainations and how Blender itself works, and videos and written tutorials for <br/>artistic tutorials<br/>Videos<br/>Videos, but not just any videos<br/>Videos from places cgcookie, or links from blendernation<br/>Videos<br/>Initially videotutorials<br/>Videos…Wiki to look up specific tools</p>
<p> </p>
<p>3. Why don't you use Wiki more often? Do you have specific complaints?</p>
<p> Wiki is not always up-to-date.<br/> I know most areas of Blender well enough to not need it most of the time at this point</p>
<p>-Blender website is often slow or non responsive<br/>---Hard to navigate backwards<br/>---otherwise don't personally need the manual anymore, unless for new features<br/> I only use it to see what's new. I know about blender everything I need to get my job done.</p>
<p>It's not updated to the last features and tools and, in any case, even if updated, the explanations <br/>are usually not clear and exhaustive enough; if you are a coder you will easily understand the meaning <br/>of cryptic technical descriptions, if you are an average user, probably not.</p>
<p>Information is outdated and 2) information in the manual is often dumped on a list without use cases. <br/>In short it is more of a reference than real teaching material</p>
<p>Outdated info, non existing info (sometimes trying to find something specifically with 2.6 selected, <br/>it just jumps back to 2.5), doesn't 'feel' easy to navigate (search bar is in weird position, feels <br/>like it should be top right).</p>
<p>The menu items on the left seem to randomly collapse leaving you with no idea where you were. The <br/>menus on the right are just subset and don't give you the whole picture. If I want to read several <br/>sections I have to keep trying to remember which bit of the menu I was on last.</p>
<p>I follow the links (to videos). The wiki is rarely ever linked, so I don't usually end up on it.</p>
<p>I mainly see it as reference documentation. Maybe it could be kept more up-to-date, but I don't think <br/>I would actually use it more because of that, it would just be that much more useful when I do need <br/>reference documentation.</p>
<p>The Wiki is often out of date on the newest features.</p>
<p>What I was looking for: How to cut cylinder in half? I found knife tutorial, but I was not successful <br/>during my attempt.</p>
<p>It needs to be kept updated and the spellchecking and formatting needs some love!</p>
<p>generally i find the navigation within the wiki confusing and search results often point me to an <br/>outdated blender, usually 2.4. i also find the description lacking the details i am looking for.</p>
<p>Tutorials - written or video - tend to not cover every single setting of a certain feature. But <br/>they do put them in the context of practical usage, and how it fits together with other features. They <br/>also put focus on subfeatures and settings relevant to a likely average project, which is often what I <br/>want to learn.<br/>Technical documentation is valuable and important and in some situations indispensable, it just <br/>doesn't tend to be that often in my own case.</p>
<p>The readability of entries - or even parts of entries - tends to vary wildly. Some large entries - <br/>like Motion Tracking - don't use top-level categoreis with line-divisions at all. <br/>The headers for sections and subsections use the same big+bold text. In the Motion Tracking entry, <br/>it's not at all apparent that "Supervised 2d tracking" is a subsection of "Getting Started". If those <br/>header levels had the distinction of big/semibig (like on Wikipedia), the nested structure would be <br/>much clearer on the page.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="font-size: 9pt;">4. What suggestions do you have to improve it so you will use it more often?</span></p>
<p> Keeping up with all the new small changes<br/> keep it up to date, make sure screenshots are current with the UI</p>
<p>perhaps the wiki could have videos explaining the features, not only text</p>
<p>Give the documentation job (paid) to USERS and not to CODERS; this is not a complaint towards coders, <br/>they obviously do their best, but there is a difference in point of views. And, always make examples <br/>to better explain.</p>
<p>I can realize that balancing reference and tutorial can be quite hard. Linking tutorials from manual <br/>entries (like it used to be in the old wiki) is a good idea. The use of techniques is endless of <br/>course, and a manual cannot hope to cover all of them, but the basic use cases should be in it. <br/>Documentation often lags behind releases. The current system is strange: people contributing code <br/>should add documentation directly in the wiki, not only in the release logs. Also, this would solve <br/>the use case issue. Every tool is made to solve a specific problem. Maybe a reminder on the <br/>development mailing list would solve this.</p>
<p> Hard to describe. Pages feel a bit cramped with menus on both sides. Rather I'd have the currently <br/>active menu expanded on the left, instead of that on the right. For example, when I expand the <br/>Compositing menu on the left and navigate to a page, on that page, the menus on the left are all <br/>collapsed again, but now suddenly the menu on the right shows where I am. I'd rather not have the <br/>right menu, just keep the active menu on the left expanded. And there's more things like that, it <br/>doesn't feel like it's working smoothly, you keep having to look for where to go next.</p>
<p>Focus on documenting new features and changes to Blender, and make those especially visible (e.g. <br/>front-page "new feature" links). Then when new features come out, I'll likely go to the wiki to learn <br/>those new features. But you've got to be fast, otherwise I'll end up at other resources first, and <br/>then I'll already have learned it.</p>
<p>Updated material would be great. It would also be nice to have a "next page" "previous page" feature <br/>instead of having to click on the index to navigate while on a chapter.</p>
<p> It my not be a bad idea to create a tutorial on manipulating simple shapes in the various options. I <br/>have found some of this on the cube of course, but not sure why it doesn't work with cylinder. Should <br/>operate across mesh I would think.</p>
<p> introduce a section called 'External links/tutorials' to the pages, linking to just that, external <br/>tuts or videos.</p>
<p>I get motivated when i get something done, so if the Wiki will tell us step-by-step what to do and at <br/>the end we achieve something I will be happy using it everyday. Some kind of Wikitutorials. For <br/>example if the Wiki will tell not only what subdivision subsurfaces does but the user models something <br/>with the help of Wiki and at some point the user uses subsurf and then the wiki emphasis about the use <br/>of subsurf.</p>
<p>make it easier to find the technique i am looking for, and include video links to relevent tutorials <br/>(or just regular links to written tutorials) so i can understand what your talking about in the wiki.</p>
<p>-Simpler explanations, as described above<br/>-More images: Screenshots, illustrations, render examples, anything<br/>-Simple step-by-step instructions to get starteed with. For example I see a lot of posts about smoke <br/>sim renders just being a big black box. </p>
<p>keep the wiki updated for more recent versions</p>
<p> The Blender 2.6 Manual should have Blender 2.6 UI's and functionality descriptions. What there is of <br/>the updated material is good… but it only takes one outdated page for confusion to set in.</p>
<p>For the pages still covering older verions (2.4 and 2.5) add a note somewhere near the top or bottom <br/>of the page stating whether or not the text on that page is still valid for the current version (and <br/>note the build if necessary).<br/>Make sure someone keeps up with #1 as Blender changes.<br/>Put in definition tooltips, the ones where when you hover your mouse over them a tooltip appears <br/>explaining what the term means. For the sake of beginners and those of us who forget what a term means <br/>twenty minutes after they encounter it, these should be on every single term that isn't part of basic <br/>English (or whatever language the docs appear in for the user).<br/>Coordinate with the developers so that by the time a new feature appears in Blender, wiki docs are <br/>ready to drop into place as well.</p>
<p><br/> I don't know that I would for sure use a wiki more often in general, since I have never particularly <br/>thought of them as being different than just a regular HTML page, but I suppose it is the layout and <br/>content being out of date.<br/>As more of a techie, I tend to prefer actual manuals that I can sit and read offline, like pdf or <br/>single HTML etc. Personally, I think manuals should be docbook or publican based and made available <br/>for online and offline consumption. A wiki complicates this since mediawiki isn't really meant to be <br/>used like we use it.</p>
<p>Maybe in addition to explanations of newer features you could add explanatory notes of what is still <br/>missing with a feature or what else is planned for it.</p>
<p>I agree with the suggestion about version notation for entries. "Last verified for 2.xx".<br/>If it's put into a good system, contributors can systematically hunt down the oldest entries to verify <br/>or update. If I were a contributor, putting that official 2.66 stamp on a page after careful checking <br/>would feel good. Maybe I'd even get a habit of checking certain features for changes between versions <br/>regularly.</p>
<p>And users with some knowledge of update history can be appropriately cautious about entries... rather <br/>than that constant feeling that maybe this was written for 2.52.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
</body></html>