- Inkscape Docs - Inkscape Mailman

Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] License for the new manual
by Martin Owens 02 May '17

02 May '17

On Tue, 2017-05-02 at 20:19 +0100, C R wrote: > but I'll bend. Thanks CR. That's very gracious. I'm counting the straw poll as: CC-BY-SA - Martin, Maren, a bending CR I'll commit us to a CC-BY-SA license by tomorrow unless some other developers or docs contributors step in against. Best Regards, Martin Owens

1 0

Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon)
by brynn 02 May '17

02 May '17

I'm confused -- I missed a step somewhere. Are we no longer talking about translating the French manual on FLOSS Manuals? Or are you talking about something else entirely? Sorry to be so simple-minded. Thanks, brynn -----Original Message----- From: C R Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2017 3:39 AM To: Maren Hachmann Cc: Victor Westmann ; inkscape-devel ; Inkscape-Docs ; brynn Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon) 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@...2...> 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. >>

3 6

Re: [Inkscape-docs] License for the new manual
by brynn 02 May '17

02 May '17

I'm not very knowledgable about licensing or licenses. But what part of GPL prohibits any of the 4 things you listed? All best, brynn -----Original Message----- From: C R Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 11:23 AM To: Brynn Cc: inkscape-devel ; Maren Hachmann ; Inkscape-Docs ; Nicolas Dufour ; Sylvain Chiron Subject: Re: License for the new manual Going to simplify a bit: >From my perspective anyone should be able to take parts of the official inkscape manual and: 1. Modify it, update it, correct it 2. Combine it with other teaching content (rules out GPL3, GPL2, and CC-BY-SA) 3. Use it in commercial products, or part of a compilation of manuals (Rules out CC-BY-NC-SA) 4. Use it any other way they like, because it's just tutorials for using Inkscape, and anyone who wants to learn or spread the word about Inkscape should be able to do so however they like. There's literally no wrong way to do that. :) imho we should avoid licenses that were not made for documentation entirely (GPL anything). Thoughts about this? -C On 2 May 2017 3:57 p.m., "brynn" <brynn@...78...> wrote: Retitled - "License for the new manual" (was "Any chance we can make some docs.....") Also copying in Sylvain, since he's been working on translation. I know there's another translator, but I can't seem to open the manual today, to look it up. So if someone knows who that is, please copy them in to this new thread. We should sort out what license we will offer the new manual under as a first step, before starting any work. We need to reach a consensus before work can proceed. Well, considering work has already started on the manual (the translating part), we might be a little behind the 8 ball. But I agree that we need to nail down the license asap. Retitling this to start the discussion. Also, according to https://fr.flossmanuals.net/start-with-inkscape/about-this-book/ This document is GPL v3. I recommend against choosing this license, as it requires all other content used along with the parts of it to be gpl 3, which is unnecessarily restrictive, especially for a document of this type. Well that's the same license as Inkscape. How is it too restrictive? For me, the main point is that it needs a license that will allow anyone to edit it. We can't get stuck with an outdated manual and have no way to edit it (as a community), ever again. All best, brynn -----Original Message----- From: C R Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 4:22 AM To: brynn Cc: Nicolas Dufour ; Maren Hachmann ; inkscape-devel ; Inkscape-Docs Subject: Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon) Also, according to https://fr.flossmanuals.net/start-with-inkscape/about-this-book/ This document is GPL v3. I recommend against choosing this license, as it requires all other content used along with the parts of it to be gpl 3, which is unnecessarily restrictive, especially for a document of this type. We should sort out what license we will offer the new manual under as a first step, before starting any work. We need to reach a consensus before work can proceed. -C On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 11:14 AM, C R <cajhne@...2...> wrote: Is anyone discussing a copyrighted book or manual at this point? If so, let's not. It's Copyleft or Public Domain. No proprietary books or content should be included in official Inkscape documentation. We need to be able to freely revise, edit, distribute without the legal entanglements. -C On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 8:28 AM, brynn <brynn@...78...> wrote: - How does version control work for booktype? This question will probably make more sense when you make the next post you promised from a different message. I had asked why we were talking about using gitlab and all that, if we were still focused on the FLOSS translation/manual. And you said you had an idea to present that you didn't have time at that moment. I can't really see a marriage of these 2 projects (free manual, copyrighted book of tutorials). But I'm looking forward to hearing your proposal :-) All best, brynn -----Original Message----- From: Maren Hachmann Sent: Monday, May 01, 2017 1:28 PM To: Nicolas Dufour ; brynn ; C R Cc: inkscape-devel ; Inkscape-Docs Subject: Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon) Hi Nicolas :D, thank you! What I would like to know (and what is now buried deep in the email stream) is: - How does version control work for booktype? Could it be combined with a git repository, or does it use a fully independent system? (I couldn't find a direct hint, maybe it's just using the django database to keep track of changes/edits?) - What is the source file format of booktype? Markdown? (guessing from the requirements for pip) Regards, Maren Am 01.05.2017 um 21:08 schrieb Nicolas Dufour: Hi all, I'm just back from two weeks away, and as the thread is very long now I didn't find time to read everything. Sorry if I'm off-topic. Le Lundi 1 mai 2017 13h07, Maren Hachmann <maren@...68...> a écrit : I only wish Nicolas or Elisa could be here to give us some more in-depth info about their server's capabilities Not sure what you mean. Of course the Inkscape project can use the French FM server for the translation, but note that an English version also exists (http://write.flossmanuals.net/). It would probably be easier to work on the English server directly. and their book's licencing. If I remember correctly, the GPLv2 was the first license that was chosen when the FM project was created about 10 years ago, and some books still use it. But the server allows users to choose a different license when creating a new book (CC, GPL, PD). As for the Inkscape book, I see it's under a GPLv3. I don't know if it can be changed (and how) or not. Elisa could probably give more details. Regards, -- Nicolas

2 2

Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon)
by brynn 02 May '17

02 May '17

I don't know C R. I'm stuck on copyright, because the link Victor gave in his original post showed an image of a hardback book. Since I'm old and old fashioned, I naturally think a published hardback book probably has a copyright. I do realize there are other kinds of publishing. I'm a little confused still, but I'm hoping Maren can clear it up soon. First we were talking about this book of tutorials. Then we realized that we should get this long awaited, much discussed, and pretty much direly needed manual off the ground. For a minute, we were all on the same page. Then for some reason, you and Maren and Martin were discussing about using the website's gitlab account for writing something - the manual? the book? I don't know what you were discussing. I remain confused on that point. And part of that seems to involve some kind of license, whether public domain or other, I didn't catch that part. Maren mentioned an idea she has for combining both projects, but hasn't had a lot of time lately. But soon, hopefully she can clarify. So that's where I'm coming from. I see a manual as part of official documention ought to have an open license, if only to facilitate allowing anyone to make future edits, so we aren't held back by needing a single author to edit it. But a published book of tutorials -- I see that as a money-making project of a single author or maybe small team, which could only have a copyright, to get published (the old-fashioned hardback way) and make sales. As I said, I have a hard time seeing these 2 different projects married. But I look forward to hearing Maren's idea. All best, brynn -----Original Message----- From: C R Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 4:14 AM To: brynn Cc: Nicolas Dufour ; Maren Hachmann ; inkscape-devel ; Inkscape-Docs Subject: Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon) Is anyone discussing a copyrighted book or manual at this point? If so, let's not. It's Copyleft or Public Domain. No proprietary books or content should be included in official Inkscape documentation. We need to be able to freely revise, edit, distribute without the legal entanglements. -C On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 8:28 AM, brynn <brynn@...78...> wrote: >> - How does version control work for booktype? > > > This question will probably make more sense when you make the next post you > promised from a different message. I had asked why we were talking about > using gitlab and all that, if we were still focused on the FLOSS > translation/manual. And you said you had an idea to present that you didn't > have time at that moment. > > I can't really see a marriage of these 2 projects (free manual, copyrighted > book of tutorials). But I'm looking forward to hearing your proposal :-) > > All best, > brynn > > -----Original Message----- From: Maren Hachmann > Sent: Monday, May 01, 2017 1:28 PM > To: Nicolas Dufour ; brynn ; C R > Cc: inkscape-devel ; Inkscape-Docs > Subject: Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some > docs material? (targeting the moon) > > > Hi Nicolas :D, > > thank you! > > What I would like to know (and what is now buried deep in the email > stream) is: > > - How does version control work for booktype? Could it be combined with > a git repository, or does it use a fully independent system? > (I couldn't find a direct hint, maybe it's just using the django > database to keep track of changes/edits?) > > - What is the source file format of booktype? Markdown? (guessing from > the requirements for pip) > > Regards, > Maren > > Am 01.05.2017 um 21:08 schrieb Nicolas Dufour: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I'm just back from two weeks away, and as the thread is very long now >> I didn't find time to read everything. Sorry if I'm off-topic. >> >> Le Lundi 1 mai 2017 13h07, Maren Hachmann <maren@...68...> a >> écrit : >>> >>> I only wish Nicolas or Elisa could be here to give us some more >>> in-depth >> >> >>> info about their server's capabilities >> >> >> >> Not sure what you mean. Of course the Inkscape project can use the >> French FM server for the translation, but note that an English >> version also exists (http://write.flossmanuals.net/). It would >> probably be easier to work on the English server directly. >> >> >>> and their book's licencing. >> >> >> If I remember correctly, the GPLv2 was the first license that was >> chosen when the FM project was created about 10 years ago, and some >> books still use it. But the server allows users to choose a different >> license when creating a new book (CC, GPL, PD). As for the Inkscape >> book, I see it's under a GPLv3. I don't know if it can be changed >> (and how) or not. Elisa could probably give more details. >> >> Regards, -- Nicolas >> >

1 0

Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon)
by Maren Hachmann 30 Apr '17

30 Apr '17

Am 30.04.2017 um 11:39 schrieb C R: > > > 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. > - This sounds to me like it would be duplicating work, when automated systems exist, but aren't used from the start. > > 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. - Yes, but we could copy the structure and contents, which are both good. I certainly don't know all the shortcuts by heart. And there are many that aren't listed in the keys.xml file. > 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. > - I fully agree that a general 'Credits' page would be sufficient. The Inkscape website contents is dual licenced, too. And we do not have individual credits for each page, word, image, link or whatever. It would be very difficult to do that anyway. Do you think that poses a problem? If someone wants to know specifically, a git blame would be sufficient to find out (this wouldn't work for the website's CMS, though)... > 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. - We could, if we used GPL... It doesn't prevent translation or modification. And we can ask, as Martin suggested. > 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. - That's certainly possible. However, I wouldn't contribute text or proofreading or maintenance help under these circumstances. There are many things that I have published as CC0 (Public Domain is impossible in Germany, because there are certain moral rights, such as 'authorship' that one cannot give up, even if one wanted to). But a manual that is made for an open source, copyleft software should fit the philosophy, in my opinion. I care about attributing work to the people who did it, and I don't want that someone who comes along to grab what they did can just deprive them of it. Regards, Maren

1 0

Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon)
by Victor Westmann 29 Apr '17

29 Apr '17

Hi Miguel, I think this is a GREAT advantage for the entire Inkscape project. It makes all the sense of the world to help users do all the needed workarounds and, if they want, help send funds to the project ($$) and/or a bug request on Gitlab(is it at Gitlab really?). Amazing. The more transparent we are (and we really are) the better. --Victor Westmann 2017-04-29 10:39 GMT-07:00 Miguel Lopez <reptillia39@...154...>: > I want to put out something regarding documentations. What about > workarounds to Inkscape limitations as part of the documentation? Some > users really need some answers to the limitation of Inkscape. There's > another idea I have in mind. For making tutorials shorter, we can use > existing tutorials of our own and linking to them as part of advanced > section of Inkscape tutorials. Advanced users should already know the > program in and out to know how to apply them for advanced rendering. > Some of those might need workarounds though. > > My only issue with those workaround is the amount of time they require, > and the tax on limited resources. Otherwise, if those weren't a issue, > they would be fantastic though they're still not a replacement to what > other programs has to offer. I can offer making workaround docs if > anyone wants me to show how to work around Inkscape limits. > > For example : > > 1) Gradient Stroke - > > 1a) Method 1 (If profile line aren't needed) - Duplicate and then adjust > stroke width, and then convert to path. Every strokes must be converted > to path. You copy and paste the path that is going to get removed by > applying the path difference. You repeat the process, and then you get > every individual stroke which can be colored as however you please. > > 1b) Method 2 (If profile line is needed) You apply the same thing to the > above, but you are not going to use stroke width. Instead, you are going > to use power stroke to emulate profile line with gradient stroke. > > 2) Realistic Rendering of convulated objects like a shoe. > > 2a) This involves series of clipping, blurring, gradient mesh and > brushing. Right now, Inkscape users can only use gradient mesh for basic > overall lighting, and some bit of coloring using filtering since > gradient mesh is underdeveloped in Inkscape. You apply blur to brushes > in order to emulate shading. Doing this a lot can give very sastifying > result within Inkscape, but also drains so much of rendering speed > within Inkscape even with a powerful computer. But results are literally > comparable to raster programs, and in some way even better because well, > it's scalable. > > 3) The lack of warp tool for textures workaround > > 3a) As of now, we do have lattice tool, and the tweak liquifying tool. > Those two can be used as a workaround to the lack of warp tool. Lattice > deformation tool should had the option of allowing users to tweak the > tangency line though instead of the tangency line being tangent to the > horizontal and vertical direction. This is not something that can have a > decent workaround since it requires duplicating so many objects and then > tweaking it would be a major pain. For complicated textures, it can't be > done within Inkscape unless you have a infinite amount of time and > resource, and as we all know that's not possible. > > 4) For people who have trouble with tangency snapping (I'm one of > those), and no that snapping option does not help one bit. > > 4a) The obvious workaround involves using the show handles. You can make > tangent line utilizing the result of the show handles LPE. Also, this > enables users to be able to create perpendicular, and tangent spiro path. > > 5) The lack of ease regarding manipulating mask/clip > > 5a) The workaround to this is well, using the clone as the > masking/clipping source while retaining the original for > clipping/masking at another location. This workaround works because you > can always manipulate the source object, and hide it. It is almost > exactly like as if you were manipulating transparency mask within Krita > or Photoshop or GIMP. After testing it, it's beautiful really when you > change between layer/group. > > 6) PDF export limitation > > 6a) The obvious workaround here is well, export to png and then convert > to pdf. Of course, some rasterization would be needed if one has to > convert to pdf, literally at times. > > I think those are the 6 issues that could be addressed via docs tutorial > for those who are desperate to find a solution to those. They can always > resort to Krita for those (except 6 because pdf export is not planned), > but that's not a option if they have to create a vector render. If > there's anything I miss regarding workarounds, lemme know. I can > probably add more workarounds if I miss anything as I know the program > in and out from a user perspective. > > > On 4/29/2017 11:54 AM, C R wrote: > >> 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(a)lists.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(a)lists.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(a)lists.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(a)lists.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(a)lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel >

1 0

Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon)
by Maren Hachmann 29 Apr '17

29 Apr '17

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(a)lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel >> >

4 5

Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon)
by brynn 29 Apr '17

29 Apr '17

>> And won't such a new book of tutorials have to be published? ..... > 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. 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. 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. 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. I'm not sure what has the translators on pause. But that seems to be the "blocker" at the moment. That's why I was asking if there was anything we non-translators can do to help. I wish I knew anyone I could ask to help, but I sure don't. 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. 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 -----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(a)lists.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(a)lists.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(a)lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

1 0

Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon)
by Martin Owens 29 Apr '17

29 Apr '17

> It's fine to pull content > from properly licenced sources, imho, too. > > I disagree. This would create a tangle of licenses and attribution > requirements that will make the contents less usable in/by other > projects. We should remove the burden of attribution where possible. It doesn't have to be a tangle if you set out the rules from the start. Copyleft exists to protect projects and attribution exists to give authors credit for their hard work. A CC-BY-SA project should be doable. But I'm hoping to examples of situations where educational materials were harmed by choosing an attribution style license. (also, if it's in a repository, the "who wrote what" becomes a bit easier) As for pulling in content from outside. Ask. Firstly ask if the author would like their work included, then ask if they could relicense their work to whatever is needed and then finally if the other two were met with enthusiasm, ask them to join the team. :-) Best Regards, Martin Owens

1 0

Re: [Inkscape-docs] [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon)
by Maren Hachmann 29 Apr '17

29 Apr '17

Am 29.04.2017 um 10:05 schrieb C R: > I have requested access to the gitlab repo. Once allowed, I'll drop a > Scribus document in there with a cover, and the master pages with some > initial styling for the document. I'll also do a README file with an > initial layout/contents proposal based on some of the ideas here. > > To my mind, the most useful thing would be getting an inkscape > quick-start guide going as the preface. This way users can start > making use of the document right away. > > We may also want to publish each section of the book as a pdf as we go > along, so users don't have to clone our repos just to get the > information. :) > > Contributors should also be aware that it's not okay to copy/paste > content from blogs, tutorials, etc. For this document, everything must > be re-written from scratch, and all screen captures, graphics etc. > must be of our own making and cc0 (public domain). Anyone not > interested in contributing 100% public domain content, should not > contribute to this project. - For a printable book, this sounds like a good idea :D For a more 'scientific' manual, I think it's not suitable to do this in Scribus, and that we should turn to a proven documentation software. I've heard that Scribus performance drops dramatically with the number of pages. How would you go about translatating the book? I strongly disagree with CC0 - I would only contribute to something that where attribution and copyleft are honored. It's fine to pull content from properly licenced sources, imho, too. There are quick start guides with good licences - this would make the process a lot faster, if it wouldn't need to be written from scratch, but only modified. So yeah, count me out :) Maren > -C > > > > On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Maren Hachmann > <maren@...68...> wrote: >> Great :) >> >> I think, in this context, it makes sense to also link to the thread on >> the translators mailing list, where many of us have already been >> discussing the issue, and started to investigate options. >> >> https://sourceforge.net/p/inkscape/mailman/inkscape-translator/thread/CAPOH… >> >> Victor (who initiated the thread) has already written about his findings >> about Sphinx there, and he also linked to a list on github, where >> different documentation systems are listed (sorry, your latest email is >> still on my todo list, Victor). >> >> Elisa has mentioned the Booktype instance of flossmanualsfr, as far as I >> remember. >> >> Regards, >> Maren >> >> Am 29.04.2017 um 00:17 schrieb Martin Owens: >>> On Sat, 2017-04-29 at 00:01 +0200, Maren Hachmann wrote: >>>> 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. >>> >>> Agreed. >>> >>> I've moved everything around and re-added the members to the group. >>> >>> Project is now: https://gitlab.com/inkscape/inkscape-docs/manuals >>> Group is now: https://gitlab.com/inkscape/inkscape-docs >>> >>> 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(a)lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel >

1 0