[Bf-docboard] wiki refactor: help cataloguing UI images!

[Tobias Regenbrecht]

mindrones wrote:
> --- On Sun, 3/22/09, Tobias Regenbrecht <regenbrecht at gmx.net> wrote:
> > With all your categorizing and templating and sorting and
> > the like, you won't
> > get a page more to be written and finished.
>
> I don't agree, all this stuff about categorizing images is for simplicity.
I hope you are right, I have made it clear that I'm skeptic about that, but 
everything that makes contributing easier is good.

> > -> make it easy to share the content with other places
> > and keep the license as
> > open as possible.
>
> What's the problem with the license?
First of all, the license is not clear. The only mentioned license would be 
Open Content License, but you can't choose another one like public domain or 
GFDL. The upload page http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Special:Upload does 
not state the license, the upload pages in other languages are even worse (at 
least the one in german).

> > -> keep the structure flat so that you can rearrange the
> > table of contents
> > without moving the pages.
>
> People in wikipedia channel just told me plain and simple that wiki is not
> a  good tools for manuals, because of its flatness (they said "just use a
> CMS"), so we should take the best from wiki with some effort for
> structuring.
I have another opinion, but who am I? I've just written a manual keeping it 
flat and I've made the experience that a flat structure is better ... but 
thay may work differently for other peoples.

> I don't see problems in moving pages. Giving a structure serves to easily
> find things out of the structure itself, so it's easy to keep things
> ordered.
The structure should be kept only in the toc and by crosslinking. Google finds 
anything well enough.

> After we'll have things refactored, we will be able to copy the manual to
> Doc:2.48/Manual and keep updating Doc:Manual, so old images will still be
> in Doc:2.48/Manual, and we'll be able to update new ones.
This is a good thing, that was not always so clear as now.


> IMO we should think to readers first. One of the main reason I started this
> is because I was frustrated sometimes reading the wiki, I just imagined all
> the other ones like me and decided to give my contribution.
I really appreciate your work and think you're doing a good job. 

Regards