Hello,
Mick Is the manager of floss manuals english. I ask him for the possibility of import the book. I give him the url, he is trying.
Regards, Elisa
2017-05-11 1:07 GMT+02:00 Maren Hachmann <maren@...68...>:
@jazznico: Is there a way to transfer books between the French flossmanuals site and the English one? I.e. would it be possible to export and import a book? Or would it be possible to have a language selection menu on flossmanualsfr instead, with English available for selection? This would make it easier for our international editors to deal with the interface.
Hi Brynn,
thanks for taking a closer look! (I'm so glad someone was able to take the time for this.)
FLOSS is the abbreviation for 'Free/Libre Open Source Software'. The websites are flossmanualsfr.net / flossmanuals.net respectively. They allow for collaborative writing of manuals for FLOSS.
I fully understand the need for a WYSIWYG editor. The one from Booktype is quite okay. Where it lacks is when you want to insert a file or image
- because you need to upload it first, then you need to find out that
the link to it that you need to enter in the insertion dialog is '/static/filename.ext'. That's more difficult than it would need to be (but you can use the same image file on different pages this way).
(Btw. what do you think of helping with the translation by making sure that all images get uploaded? When I copy-paste from the French book, I get all the images, but they are just links to the original book, not part of the one I'm editing. And it takes quite some time to rename the files to something English, upload, add a useful placeholder text and then exchange the links. I'd prefer to spend that time on translating.)
About the 'location', I've had this silly idea:
As a first step, we create/translate/update this introductory manual at flossmanuals (if possible at the English site, to make it easier for contributors). It's a great way for getting people started with Inkscape.
As a second step, or in parallel, we could also have a more glossary-like, more technical manual, that explains what each menu item /LPE/... does. This technical manual could also be used by developers to document their changes, and it could use the more technical style with Sphinx/reST/readthedocs. It could even start out simple, with keywords / lists, and be refined by people who don't like those ;-)
(btw. I have volunteered to set this up, seems you overlooked ;-) - for customization, translation and version branches, I'd still have to learn a bit, but it doesn't appear to be too hard).
The one issue I see with this split is that it would spread resources (us) a bit wide, maybe. But from the time when I started using Inkscape, I know that having a manual like the one Elisa wrote would have helped me a lot - I barely understood a word in Tav's manual.
Now, as an advanced user, I (claim I) know everything that Elisa explains, but Tav's more technical manual contains so much more info, which I'm now able to understand (and often have the urge to update).
So that's why I think that having two different manuals wouldn't be such a bad idea. The technical manual could be written by the more technical users and, hopefully, devs (when they change something).
Well, just an idea. Let me know if you think it's crap ;-)
Kind Regards, Maren
Am 10.05.2017 um 07:47 schrieb brynn:
Hi Everyone, I've tried to read up and study and understand the info which Maren presented. Because my understanding is extremely limited, I hesitate to offer any comments at all. But for whatever it might be worth, here they are....along with a couple of questions.
First, one of your last comments:All of them would be FLOSS, have support for internal linking, allow to
insert images and allow editing via browser.
I think you're using "FLOSS" as a generic umbrella term, asopposed to the FLOSS Manuals, right? Because a couple of the Cons are lack of wysiwyg, which I've had the understanding Floss Manuals has (although I haven't seen it yet). So you don't mean that Floss Manuals can be used for the writing, for all of them, and then exported out or transfered elsewhere for publishing, right?
Gitlab Wiki + X It seems to me like the lack of a wysiwyg editor is the most limiting factor (at least for as much as I understand). I'm just thinking of people who might be interested in joining the manual or documentation team. This is a good non-coding opportunity for non-programmers, to contribute to the project. They might be less likely to participate if they had to learn, even a simple language like Markdown, or whatever you call the code that wikis use.
Gitlab Editor + Sphinx / readthedocs
- learning curve for admin (theming, plugins,...)
You must mean that someone else besides Martin would be the admin for the manual project? Or, as admin for the gitlab account, is there something about this option that he would need to learn still?
All the pros for this option make it sound so good (at least what I can understand). But still no wysiwyg editor. I still think that might scare away some potential contributors.
Booktype
So far, this sounds like the best option to me.
Gitbook
The 5 contributor limit for free hosting sounds untennable to me.
So based on my feeble understanding of all this, I'd vote forBooktype.
All best, brynn
-----Original Message----- From: Maren Hachmann Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 5:59 PM To: C R ; Inkscape Devel List ; Inkscape-Docs Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Any chance we can make some docs material? (targeting the moon)
Hi,
sorry for the delay. I've been trying things out a bit, and I feel I haven't seen enough yet, but I won't have time tomorrow, so posting anyway now.
So, it seems that what we still need for a manual (any kind) is a platform to create it (not only write, but also output to different formats).
I have had a chance to look at 3 different platforms on my list, and I'm trying to outline the pros and cons, as I perceive them, please add yours to the list. There are many more platforms in existance (see also: https://github.com/PharkMillups/beautiful-docs#generating-docs), and if anyone here has some experience with them, please add.
- Gitlab Wiki + X, as suggested by Martin.
WHAT: An online Wiki on gitlab with a source code editor, associated with a gitlab project.
PROS:
- custom-made to suit the project's individual needs (no specifics
yet)
- Preview functionality
CONS:
- only (limited set of) Markdown, RDoc or AsciiDoc
- limited formatting options, formatting not so much about 'roles'
of formatted text, but more about 'looks'
- the backend isn't written yet
- no option for branches via interface (so we could start writing
for trunk, and continue fixing for stable)
- no direct translation support
- support for the backend depends upon a single individual, no user
community
- no WYSIWYG editor
- no GUI access to git repo, for managing where to put uploaded
files etc.
- no GUI for undoing a change (like in a 'normal' Wiki), or looking
at a diff
EXAMPLE (frontend): https://gitlab.com/inkscape/inkscape-web/wikis/home
- Gitlab Editor + Sphinx / readthedocs:
WHAT: A git repository with an online source code editor and documentation update on readthedocs.org on save (i.e. commit).
PROS:
- available quickly (didn't know how it works exactly, but got it
all up and running with test content within an evening)
- uses git and reStructured Text
- allows to have branches, so devel version features can be
documented when they are coded
- supports translations (not entirely sure how, though, haven't
tested it yet, wanted to send this email instead. E.g. Django docs are translated. Fallback to English if no translation of a document. I think they use different branches.)
- free theming, separately for each output format
- free hosting, can also use our own domain name with
readthedocs.org, e.g. docs.inkscape.org
- after installing some programs, tool chain runs locally
- preview via gitlab editor or local editor
- same toolchain can be used for developer documentation (includes
code documentation from docstrings)
- extensible via plugins (haven't had a chance to take a closer look
yet or test any)
- I think it's possible to add a 'edit this page on gitlab' link to
each page, to get new contributors, even when using readthedocs.org (not tested, but read that others did similar things)
- extremely wide range of export formats via plugins
- infinite hierarchy nesting
- syntax highlighting (e.g. for command line usage instructions, or
extension writers)
- video embedding (not tested)
CONS:
- learning curve for admin (theming, plugins,...)
- learning curve for editors (syntax, workflow)
- no WYSIWYG editor, only preview (incomplete, because doesn't
support all sphinx stuff)
EXAMPLE:
- repository:
https://gitlab.com/Moini/inkscape-extensions-multi-bool/tree/master/docs
- rendered documentation:
http://inkscape-multi-bool-extension.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html
- Booktype:
WHAT: A web portal for creating books, hosted by friends of the Inkscape project.
PROS:
- available right now, no further setup required
- best interface by far, easy and intuitive to use
- team functions, user roles, chat
- prevents concurrent editing
- wide range of export and import formats
- support for themes/settings for specific export formats (e.g.
different font sizes etc.)
- free hosting and maintenance via flossmanuals(fr)
- community of experienced documentors
CONS:
- confinement to django database for version control, more difficult
to get data out of it again for editing
- no direct translation support (make a copy of the book, copy
changes over after doing a comparison in the history)
- limited versioning support (only the latest one can be
edited)
- we'd need to ask someone to add CC-By-SA licence (currently, the
options I got were CC-By, GPL. I guess this would be quick and easy to solve.)
EXAMPLE (rendered documentation): https://www.flossmanualsfr.net/initiation-inkscape/
All of them would be FLOSS, have support for internal linking, allow to insert images and allow editing via browser.
I wish it were possible to combine the ease of use of the booktype frontend with the portability, branch support, sustainability and versatility of the gitlab/sphinx/readthedocs backend...
(In German that's called the 'eierlegende Wollmilchsau' - egg-laying wool- and milk-giving pig...)
For the sphinx option, I believe I'd be able to take on the first setup and some of the tasks that come with customization and extending, as well as basic maintenance. For Booktype, anyone of the documentation writers could do that easily.
Regards, Maren
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@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-docs mailing list Inkscape-docs@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-docs