[Bf-docboard] Page Updates - mesh editing; also mesh editing section thoughts
Jim Tucker
jim.tucker at live.co.uk
Sat Dec 29 20:15:12 CET 2012
Great to have you back again, Jared. You've obviously put a lot of effort into documenting the new mesh features. Please, can you tell me how to look at your new pages?
I agree that mesh section needs some form of layout change - in fact, I think the whole modelling layout in the Manual needs a rework (it's too big). Any other views?
Regards,
Jim Tucker (sculptorjim)
> From: bf-docboard-request at blender.org
> Subject: Bf-docboard Digest, Vol 94, Issue 20
> To: bf-docboard at blender.org
> Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:00:01 +0100
>
> 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: Page Updates - mesh editing; also mesh editing section
> thoughts (Kesten Broughton)
> 2. Re: Page Updates - mesh editing; also mesh editing section
> thoughts (Jared Reisweber)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 08:59:44 -0600
> From: Kesten Broughton <solarmobiletrailers at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-docboard] Page Updates - mesh editing; also mesh
> editing section thoughts
> To: Blender Documentation Project <bf-docboard at blender.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CAO2fFsXwRsp8v5KhYc1zo3k9XyUjQWuxLtH=wEpEGF3FgFosQQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> 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
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-docboard/attachments/20121228/93605110/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 12:40:58 -0800
> From: Jared Reisweber <jaredr122 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-docboard] Page Updates - mesh editing; also mesh
> editing section thoughts
> To: Blender Documentation Project <bf-docboard at blender.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CAJgraRRMNJvMbFcwXWNpSmb-pSKPz5+=FOJ11kNf30G-ND5wpg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> 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-0001.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-docboard mailing list
> Bf-docboard at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-docboard
>
>
> End of Bf-docboard Digest, Vol 94, Issue 20
> *******************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-docboard/attachments/20121229/10358dbf/attachment.htm
More information about the Bf-docboard
mailing list