[Bf-docboard] Bf-docboard Digest, Vol 50, Issue 4
Roger Wickes
rogerwickes at yahoo.com
Mon Mar 23 01:40:13 CET 2009
As of a long time now, the sandbox particles pages are no where even remotely complete enough to be moved into the wiki, much less supercede what is there. While what is there is outdated, it is far better than what the sandbox has to offer.
----------------
Sent by Roger Wickes for intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and contact Mr. Wickes immediately.
________________________________
From: "bf-docboard-request at blender.org" <bf-docboard-request at blender.org>
To: bf-docboard at blender.org
Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2009 10:03:02 AM
Subject: Bf-docboard Digest, Vol 50, Issue 4
Send Bf-docboard mailing list submissions to
bf-docboard at blender.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-docboard
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
bf-docboard-request at blender.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
bf-docboard-owner at blender.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Bf-docboard digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Request to delete page (mindrones)
2. Re: Request to delete page (Tobias Regenbrecht)
3. Re: Request to delete page (mindrones)
4. Re: Request to delete page (Tobias Regenbrecht)
5. Re: wiki refactor: help cataloguing UI images! (mindrones)
6. Re: wiki refactor: help cataloguing UI images!
(Tobias Regenbrecht)
7. Re: wiki refactor: help cataloguing UI images! (Kernon Dillon)
-----Inline Message Follows-----
Hi,
--- On Sun, 3/22/09, Tobias Regenbrecht <regenbrecht at gmx.net> wrote:
> I need to get the page
> "Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles"
> to be deleted. Else I couldn't move the page
> "Meta:Sandbox/Particles/Startpage"
The best thing is to move Meta:Sandbox/Particles/Startpage to Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles, wiki will ask if ok to delete Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles and we say yes (this may require to sysop permission)
Doing this will delete the redirect Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles -> Meta:Sandbox/Particles/Startpage of course.
I can do the move if it's ok, but Meta:Sandbox/Particles/Startpage contains 3 links to incomplete (sandbox) pages, so not sure if you wanna complete those first :)
If you need to talk, I'm in chat when possible.
Laters,
Luca
_____________
http://www.mindrones.com
-----Inline Message Follows-----
mindrones wrote:
> --- On Sun, 3/22/09, Tobias Regenbrecht <regenbrecht at gmx.net> wrote:
> > I need to get the page
> > "Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles"
> > to be deleted. Else I couldn't move the page
> > "Meta:Sandbox/Particles/Startpage"
>
> The best thing is to move Meta:Sandbox/Particles/Startpage to
> Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles, wiki will ask if ok to delete
> Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles and we say yes (this may require to sysop
>permission)
I can't move the page, so if you can move the page please do it.
> I can do the move if it's ok, but Meta:Sandbox/Particles/Startpage contains
> 3 links to incomplete (sandbox) pages, so not sure if you wanna complete
> those first :)
No, I have not created these pages. But I will complete the documentation on
particles in the following two weeks.
Regards
-----Inline Message Follows-----
--- On Sun, 3/22/09, Tobias Regenbrecht <regenbrecht at gmx.net> wrote:
> I can't move the page, so if you can move the page please
> do it.
Done. Also, in Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles, I've update the link to old doc to Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles 2.45
> No, I have not created these pages. But I will complete the
> documentation on
> particles in the following two weeks.
Ok, the pages still incomplete are:
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Meta:Sandbox/Manual/Particles-Emitter
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Meta:Sandbox/Manual/Particles-Reactor
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Meta:Sandbox/Manual/Particles-Hair
Regards,
Luca
_____________
http://www.mindrones.com
-----Inline Message Follows-----
mindrones wrote:
> --- On Sun, 3/22/09, Tobias Regenbrecht <regenbrecht at gmx.net> wrote:
> > I can't move the page, so if you can move the page please
> > do it.
>
> Done. Also, in Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles, I've update the link to old
> doc to Doc:Manual/Physics/Particles 2.45
>
> > No, I have not created these pages. But I will complete the
> > documentation on
> > particles in the following two weeks.
>
> Ok, the pages still incomplete are:
> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Meta:Sandbox/Manual/Particles-Emitter
> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Meta:Sandbox/Manual/Particles-Reactor
> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Meta:Sandbox/Manual/Particles-Hair
Thanks a lot, at last this will come to an end soon.
Regards
-----Inline Message Follows-----
Hi,
--- 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.
Mikahl is going to finish the job, so now we can clearly see what's missing and what's ok, have a look here
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mindrones/Reference/UI_elements
(Tuesday I'll update it with all elements, I do the wikitext with a pyscript I don't have here at the moment :)
I'll link that page to the style guide after the clean up, so that it will be a resource for writers.
I'll do also a page with non-categorized images, so that we can keep this up to date.
The idea of templating comes from some discussion about automating screenshot creation in 2.5x: a Blender "demon" on a server can create screenshots and it will just a matter of update templates with a bot.
Once this will be set, writers will just have to consult a page with available screenshots in a page similar to
http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Mindrones/Reference/UI_elements
Think about this as an experiment for some future simplification :)
> -> keep it as simple as possible for others to contribute.
I don't see the problem if things will be well explained in the style guide.
If people will ignore the style guide at least it will be easy to update things on the way.
> -> 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?
> -> 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 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.
Three months ago there were a lot of old/incomplete/doubled pages which required some thinking to know what to do about. That was too much confusing.
> -> most images can be used only once, because they show
> something specific. If
> they show something specific it shouldn't be necessary to
> describe them
> twice, so they are used at a unique place. This may be
> different for
> tutorials though.
You can still use the images as you do now if you prefer.
As said before, better to stick to a style guide though.
> -> keep old pages intact, including the images. At least
> the author of the
> page needs to be honored, don't throw his work away he will
> never come back.
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.
> -> never ever offend an author by ripping a page apart
> he has written. The
> authors are the most valuable good you have, honor their
> work they do it
> voluntarily.
It's not a personal thing of course. It's just a practical thing.
Keeping an old page just for the sake of not offending someone makes the manual old very soon.
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.
Hope this can help to make things more clear :)
Regards,
Luca
_____________
http://www.mindrones.com
-----Inline Message Follows-----
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
-----Inline Message Follows-----
Hello, I thought I might chime in and comment on the issue of moving pages. Maybe I'm missing some of the details but I think that if pages are moved there definitely needs to be some automated redirecting put into place. There is a mountain of external resources (articles, tutorials, forum posts, blog posts, etc.) that link to specific wiki pages and those links will become dead links. Not cool at all.
There are already too many dead links in the community that have been created from wiki pages being rearranged without proper redirecting.
Hopefully, I'm missing some details. I'll admit that I haven't been following the discussion entirely.
Thanks for the efforts!
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Tobias Regenbrecht <regenbrecht at gmx.net> wrote:
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
_______________________________________________
Bf-docboard mailing list
Bf-docboard at blender.org
http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-docboard
--
Kernon Dillon
BlenderNewbies.com
a learning resource for Blender3D
_______________________________________________
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/20090322/5fa56287/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the Bf-docboard
mailing list