[Bf-docboard] Page Updates - mesh editing; also mesh editing section thoughts

[Jared Reisweber]

cool, thanks.

-2. I'm not sure what the right organization of this section is exactly.
It's hard to categorize some tools, like the new rip fill for example; its
a vertex/edge operation, but it also creates faces, and both separates and
adds geometry, while it is closely related to the normal rip tool, which is
under vertex editing.

-3. In autodesk manuals, there is a page title, section2 is a "bar" (text
with background color that spans the page width), section3 is bold text,
and a section4 is a bar again, but is indented. Something to this effect
might be better: (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:IndentSections),
indent section3 and up, and reserve section 1 for page titles. Or promote
section2 to section1 style , and 3 to 2, then indent starting section4.
They also have different text color/weight for "terms," ( equivalent of
{{Literal|..}}) which helps them stand out better from their description,
which I think would be an improvement as well.

On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Kesten Broughton <
solarmobiletrailers at gmail.com> wrote:

> Nice work jared,
>
> 1.  I had a quick look at a few pages and they look good.  If anyone has
> time for a thorough critique of a page or two, go ahead, but Jared is an
> experienced contributor so edit away!
>
> 2.  Did mindrones and co have a process for structural changes to the
> wiki?  If so, we should put Jared's suggestions through it.  If not, I
> suggest we use this list for discussion of the proposed adds/removals.
>  Perhaps after a week, we can announce the proposed changes to
> bf-committers to get buy-in from them as well.
>
> 3.  Regarding sections, I agree it's tough to tell between a ==section 2==
> and ===section 3==.  I would be open to suggestions for adding additional
> notation to distinguish them, however, this might be a bit of a project to
> retroactively refit the whole wiki to maintain consistency.  A short script
> would probably do it, but someone has to write and test it.  If wikimedia
> says one ==section1== per page, i'd be reluctant to ignore that unless
> there were very strong arguments for it.
>
> kesten
>
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 3:05 AM, Jared Reisweber <jaredr122 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hello, I've decided to return to help work on the wiki. (I'll try not to
>> screw it up this time). It would be great to see it get finished next year.
>> I've updated a bunch of mesh editing pages to reflect 2.6 and added some
>> images:
>>  basic editing, smooth, noise, shrink/fatten, vertex editing, mirror
>> editing, face editing, mirror, edge editing, knife tool, bevel (most of
>> these were empty).
>> There's a bit more work todo on some of these pages.
>> It's kind of alarming to see how many page views some of these empty
>> pages have...
>>
>> I'd like to try to help update the pages to reflect all the 2.6 mesh
>> editing features, however I think the organization of this section may need
>> some reworking in the future (irrelevant pages, missing pages, etc.).
>> Currently the pages in this section are the same as the 2.4 manual, but
>> many new tools have been added.
>> Right now, there are some sections for individual mesh tools, however
>> only a portion of them. If mesh tools are going to have their own page, I
>> would think all of them should probably have their own page, except for
>> very similar tools, e.g. fill/beauty fill. However, I'm not positive that
>> many of the mesh tools are significant enough to have their own page,
>> though there should be some consistency. There may be some redundancy with
>> some of the existing pages, for example, Vertex/Edge/Face Editing, where
>> some tools on those pages are not exclusive to vertices/edges/faces.
>>
>> Pages that should probably be removed from index, as they are now options
>> in other tools:
>> Spin dup, Subdivide fractal, subdivide smooth, Extrude dup(extinct?)
>> New tools I'm not sure where to put:
>> Vertex connect, wireframe, inset, unsubdivide
>>
>>  Anyways, here is an outline<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jYTZoT3l263fp36mbp8NAPK_sKgeJIMmacd0KOsHA18/edit>of all the existing core mesh tools arranged by roughly by category (red
>> text indicates tools not yet documented). I did want to put out the
>> possibility of having page links go to sections of pages, maybe. This would
>> allow all the tools to be exposed on the index page, but not have to have
>> so many small individual pages. Just a thought.
>>
>> In the meantime, I will continue to help update this section as best I
>> can.
>>
>> Regarding page formatting, I keep seeing pages for things where there is
>> a single =section1=, and all other sections are ==section2== and
>> ===section3=== under the first section. It's visually very hard to tell the
>> difference between a section2 and a section3. Is there a standard for how
>> sections in pages should work? It would be nice if there was a better way
>> of differentiating between section2/section3 and so on, like an indent, or
>> something. According to the mediawiki docs, there should only be one
>> section1, but I find that it makes pages difficult to read.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-docboard mailing list
>> Bf-docboard at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-docboard
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Kesten Broughton
> President and Technology Director,
> Solar Mobile Trailers
> kesten at solarmobiletrailers.com
> www.sunfarmkitchens.ca <http://www.sunfarmkitchens.ca>
> 512 701 4209
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20121228/7fe10086/attachment.htm