I also think this is not the same as a manual, which should be quick to
browse, quick to grasp, with lots of interlinks, with a file format
suitable for version control (well, yes, Scribus is xml, I've been told,
so it would be /readable/ - but those diffs are really ugly), with
out-of-the-box automated generation of online versions of a manual - as
can be done with tools like sphinx/readthedocs, doctype, and other tools

Martin and I are thinking gitlab + markdown will suffice for the basis of contribution, and we can worry about scribus and doc publishing later.



Also, it would be good if things like the keyboard+mouse reference and
other stuff we already have could be included.

Probably should use markdown code to identify key shortcuts in plain text. Makes them easier to edit, diff, and provides an easy way to add new ones.

 Also, crediting people for their work is just
something that makes them more willing to contribute (as stated above).
CC-By would lose that, after the first iteration, as far as my
understanding of the licence goes.

We get into the territory of having to  edit each and every diagram or screen capture. It's messy. I think a better credit would be to have a contributor page for those who contribute the most. If that's insufficient credit, I think people might be contributing for the wrong reasons.

Some of the people involved in flossmanualsfr are also long-time
contributors to and developers of Inkscape, so that's the relation.

But you see how the licensing gets in the way? We can't use any of it now. People wanted credit more than they wanted to have the contents be reusable. GPL is for software. People try to rewrite for content, but that's not what it's for. Worse, it imposes more restrictions than CC-BY. 


I think it's best to say something like: "Unless otherwise stated, all content in this book is CC0, Public Domain." Then, those who require attribution can include it in the caption below the graphics. 

The NC licence is maybe a bit overprotective, but I'm all for crediting
and having a manual be available for anyone who needs it.

Yes, let's not do NC. The point of this is to get it into as many hands as possible. People want a bit of money to handle printing and distribution, let them. It's less work for the project and more free publicity.


-C




Maren


Am 29.04.2017 um 21:22 schrieb C R:
> Also this: http://write.flossmanuals.net/inkscape/
>
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 8:04 PM, C R <cajhne@...400...> wrote:
>>>> Books done in Scribus can be "published" in a variety of ways,....
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I understand that.  But I thought Victor was talking about a hardback
>>> book, like at the link he provided.  That kind of book is hard to get
>>> published, unless you have some prior agreement with a publisher.  At least
>>> that's my understanding.
>>
>> We can self-publish, but we'd have to order a thousand copies, which
>> would take some startup funds. I don't think hardback would be
>> necessary.
>> In fact, I don't imagine printing is necessary. We could render out a
>> nice illustration of the book, with "ebook" under it, and people can
>> enjoy the aesthetic without downing a bunch of trees to make physical
>> copies of the manual. Virtual copies have great things like
>> hyperlinks, and text search capabilities. So there are more benefits
>> to having a digital copy anyway.
>>
>>> Somewhere in this thread was some discussion about licensing.  If this is to
>>> be a hardback book (old fashioned way of publishing) *to me* it makes more
>>> sense to carry a copyright.
>>
>> The only requirement for a published physical book is an isbn number
>> (for product catalog, and inventory purposes). The license of the
>> book, as I understand it, is left completely open to the authors. We
>> would not have this published by a company interested in owning the
>> copyright, of course.
>>
>>> As far as I understand, publishers take a cut
>>> of sales.  And if it's a public domain content, there wouldn't be many
>>> sales.  It seems like it would make it even harder to find a publisher.
>>
>> A publisher isn't necessary for this project, assuming the content is
>> what's important. If we want book sales out of this, that's the point
>> where it will become an issue.
>>
>>> I don't know, maybe I'm old and old fashioned.  But the FLOSS manual, on the
>>> other hand, certainly should be either public domain, or CC-BY-NC-SA might
>>> be better.  Whatever it needs to have, to allow the community to edit.
>>
>> All I can guarantee is that my contributions will be public domain. :)
>>
>>> This is probably a bad idea.  But I'm trying to think outside the box.  What
>>> if I (or other non-French-speaker) took one of the French pages, and sent it
>>> through the public google and/or bing translators.  I know those are far
>>> from perfect.  (Sooooo far!)  But since I know Inkscape, it seems like it
>>> would give me enough of a clue what it's about, to be able to write it
>>> properly in English.
>>
>> Well, translation plus proof-reading is fine I'd think. It's not like
>> the subject matter would be alien to you. :) Fact is, you could easily
>> re-write from scratch the missing sections in English, then we would
>> be able to use it in our own "official" Inkscape manual too.
>>
>>> Then maybe the translators can proof read it, to make sure something
>>> important wasn't missed?  Proof reading would seem to be much less
>>> time-consuming for them.
>>>
>>> Would that work??
>>>
>>> All best,
>>> brynn
>>
>>
>> As I understand it, the Inkscape Project has nothing to do with
>> flossmanuals, so perhaps it's beyond the scope of this project.
>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message----- From: C R
>>> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2017 9:54 AM
>>> To: brynn
>>> Cc: Inkscape-Docs ; Inkscape Devel List ; Maren Hachmann ; Victor Westmann
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material?
>>> (targeting the moon)
>>>
>>>> I don't mean to slow anyone's roll here.  But wouldn't it make more sense
>>>> to put
>>>> any kind of energy towards documentation into the much discussed, direly
>>>> needed,
>>>> user-focused, step by step manual?  Rather than starting from scratch on a
>>>> whole
>>>> different kind of project?
>>>
>>>
>>> Yea, this actually makes a lot of sense as a first step.
>>>
>>>> There are many books out there already, which amount to a series of
>>>> tutorials.
>>>> It's not a bad thing.  I just think this kind of project is better suited
>>>> for a
>>>> single author, or maybe a small team.  And I think the project needs the
>>>> manual
>>>> much, more more than the community needs another book of tutorials.
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree. I think the book could be a lot of things in one. But I agree
>>> with finishing what we already have before starting something new.
>>>
>>>
>>>> As far as I understand, all that's needed is an English translation
>>>> of...well
>>>> can't find a link to the French version.  Here's a link to whatever has
>>>> been
>>>> translated already:
>>>> https://fr.flossmanuals.net/start-with-inkscape/introduction/
>>>
>>>
>>> I can't help with translation, unfortunately. But I'd like to see this
>>> finished. So +1 for the suggestion.
>>>
>>>> Once we have the translation, we'll be off and running to update and
>>>> finish it!
>>>> By the way, is there anything those of us who can't translate, can do, to
>>>> help
>>>> the translators?
>>>
>>>
>>> I volunteer to help this effort in what ways are needed.
>>>
>>>> And won't such a new book of tutorials have to be published?  A big
>>>> obstacle to
>>>> writing any book is getting it published.  You almost have to have an
>>>> invitation
>>>> from a publisher to be certain a book will get published.  Or publish it
>>>> yourself, which is not easy eitiher.
>>>
>>>
>>> Books done in Scribus can be "published" in a variety of ways, opened
>>> in browsers, laptops, eReaders, or just printed out. We could sell
>>> printed copies along with other Inkscape stuff. Maybe copies signed by
>>> members of the project would be kinda cool. No idea what the market is
>>> for it, but the idea that we could do all of these at once is
>>> attractive, and why I recommend Scribus.
>>>
>>> -C
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just my opinion  :-)
>>>>
>>>> brynn
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Maren Hachmann
>>>> Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 4:01 PM
>>>> To: Inkscape-Docs ; Inkscape Devel List
>>>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material?
>>>> (targeting the moon)
>>>>
>>>> Would it make sense to use gitlab's new subgroups feature for this?
>>>>
>>>> The inkscape-docs team could be a sub-team of Inkscape, that way. There
>>>> are only 4 members as of now, so changing wouldn't be so difficult as it
>>>> might be later on.
>>>>
>>>> Maren
>>>>
>>>>> Am 28.04.2017 um 16:14 schrieb Martin Owens:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 2017-04-28 at 12:39 +0100, C R wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd love to quit my job and just do docs. :) Unfortunately, that's
>>>>>>> what it would probably take to get docs going to the extent we'd
>>>>>>> like.
>>>>>>> It's been discussed before, but never gone anywhere because of lack
>>>>>>> of time/hands involved.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, we should use Scribus to do it. In fact, it should probably be a
>>>>>>> github project to attract contributors. This way we can patch what
>>>>>>> needs to be patched when stuff changes in subsequent releases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds like you have a solid step one Chris.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's the inkscape-docs group on gitlab, EVERYONE should join, there
>>>>>> should be a button to join:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://gitlab.com/inkscape-docs
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And here's the new book/manual/docs project where files can be put:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://gitlab.com/inkscape/manuals
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I recommend using the wiki attached to the project to plan the
>>>>>> adventure slowly. Add a bit at a time and don't rush to have something
>>>>>> "complete" but have something small produced.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best Regards, Martin Owens
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>>>>>> Inkscape-devel@...1784...sourceforge.net
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>>>> Inkscape-devel@...1784...sourceforge.net
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>>>> Inkscape-devel@...1784...sourceforge.net
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>>
>>>
>