Re: [Inkscape-docs] more prominent link to the wiki?

Hi Maren (and whoever else might be interested), For the new faq item pointing to the roadmap, I'm thinking in the first section .... Did you already do this? Or was it already done, and I didn't realize it? That's why it's showing unpublished? (banging head smiley again!) Ok if I add the caution about the flexibility of the roadmap?

Re the list of wiki articles that I thought needed to be added to documentation, that are currently linked from the faq. Ok, so attached is a new document I started, with these faq items at the top, and we can add below as we work through the wiki.

Briefly, it sounds like we agree that #1 and #2 would be good to be documented. #3 and #4 are no longer applicable (the faq items which linked to them aren't there anymore -- I think there was some last minute editing, or otherwise sometime since I wrote that list, that those items were either dropped or changed, and the info isn't needed).

However, I think it would be awesome to have instructions for compiling, for all 3 supported systems!

#5 is the Illustrator info. When I first started with Inkscape, there was some demand for this info. I used to see messages in forums from Illustrator users wishing to switch over -- at least enough messages to warrant the article or chapter in the manual. I haven't seen a message like that for probably.....2 or 3 years. I'm not sure why. It seems to me that the info should still be relevant (current info, I mean, current to both programs). But let's not get too hung up on how to accomplish this stuff. Let's just make the list for Step 1. And maybe by the time we're done, we'll be getting some ideas about Step 2. How does that sound?

Shortly after I send this, I'll add the list of 10 or 15 pages from the list I told you I had started (separate from the 1 for the faq), and we can discuss whenever we have time. Does that sound ok?

All best, brynn -------------------------------------------------- From: "Maren Hachmann" <maren@...68...> Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2015 8:52 AM To: "Brynn" <brynn@...78...>; <inkscape-docs(a)lists.sourceforge.net&gt; Subject: Re: [Inkscape-docs] more prominent link to the wiki? > Hi Brynn, > > Am 20.06.2015 um 06:00 schrieb Brynn: >> Hi Maren, >> Out of curiosity, when you type "wik" in you browser, how does it >> know to find the Inkscape wiki, and not Wikipedia, or Wikimedia, or some >> other program's wiki, etc? > > - The browser proposes the pages I have visited most often first ;) The > other pages range below in the list it shows me. > > >> If users are looking to the Roadmap as "set in stone" then they >> simply need to be informed properly. For as long as I've been using >> Inkscape (8 years), the wiki has been a resource for both users and >> developers. Most of them have no idea that it's being groomed as >> 'developer only'. Ask Martin how many times I asked him to confirm >> that, Yes, the wiki will only be for developers. At least 4 or 5, as I >> recall. **It's a radical change, and afaik, I'm the only user who knows >> that.** > > - I'm a user, too ;) > New people who want to download, or learn about Inkscape - at least in > my google results - are guided to inkscape.org, not to > wiki.inkscape.org. For the first few weeks that I was here, I didn't > even know the Wiki existed (until I translated the pages that link to > it). > It seems this was different in a time when I haven't been part of the > project, didn't know that. > >> Not only do I have a list of wiki articles that are user-related, >> that are linked from the FAQ (attached), I actually started to make a >> list of ALL wiki articles that are for users. But I started getting >> tripped up when I came to things I didn't understand, and wasn't sure if >> they were for users or not. >> I would be glad to start working on that again, if I could get >> some guidance from you, on pages where I have questions. All I could do >> is make a list, but that might be a starting place for someone else? > > - Sounds like we have a volunteer ;) - seriously, I believe it's a good > idea to make a list of which info should be accessible more easily to > users. I can't promise we can take *everything* to the website (esp. > those things that will be in the manual might not be needed there), but > we should find out what could be missing, and give it proper thought. > >> (Note that when I first started working on the FAQ, I don't think >> you were involved yet. After I announced some of my work on the dev >> mailing list, it was Bryce who said that if I found info in the wiki >> which really should be in the documentation, to make note of it. It's >> possible that it's not appropriate for some of this to be documented, >> but that was my best understanding at the time.) >> I guess the FAQ would be my best idea as the best place for the >> Roadmap to be linked, if it should not be on the website. But it would >> go a long way towards preventing users from thinking it's "a done deal" >> by putting a simple sentence at the top of the page, to that effect. >> That could also be said in the faq. >> I was just about to add those couple of links I've been putting >> off adding. So shall I make the new faq item for the roadmap, while I'm >> at it? > > - Go ahead :) - sounds good to me. > >>> - You're quite hardy :) >>> I've internally categorized most of the Wiki pages as 'outdated' or >>> 'describing a plan, but not necessarily the real implementation'... >> >> Inkscape forums can be quite competitive, as to who gets the right >> answer. Although it's never really verbalized, many are aware! >> >> Where can I look to find out whether a page is outdated or describing a >> plan? > > - Argh. That's difficult. You'd actually need to know the current state > to *know* if the info is still correct. > > So there are a few options: > - Look at the top of the page. If there's a hint that the info is > outdated, discard right away. > > - Look at the history of the page, to see when it was last changed. This > is not a really good indicator, because a few things just don't change, > but it can give you a hint. > > - Compare with your own knowledge about the topic. Is it different? > (That's where it gets difficult... Neither you nor I nor Martin will be > able to tell that for all wiki pages) > > - Ask someone who might know. > (This is difficult, too - we know that we don't always get answers... > and that people often react annoyed to this kind of question, or say > they will help and then never get around to it. This does not have > priority for many.) > > For much of the user-relevant contents, I guess you and I will be able > to judge if it is current, with the help of suv for OS X questions. > We might not be able to say this for pages about comparisons with other > software, which we do not own. > > About the attached list of Wiki articles: > > - some of the Illustrator stuff seems no longer really necessary, as we > now have the keyboard shortcut editor, which also has the option to > choose the Illustrator shortcuts from the dropdown. For the other > things, I'm not sure a comparison is a good topic for us... > As both programs have evolved since that article was written, I'm > inclined to think that much of it will be outdated. If someone made a > more current comparison, this would be good as some kind of article, > with version numbers and dates, so everyone can see which versions this > refers to. > > - Latex is important. Should definitely be part of the manual. Or we > could write some kind of official article, with a date on it and a > reference to the version number. Problem is, I can't contribute any info > there. I also don't know who can (in the answers section, these > questions usually remain unanswered). And the extensions seem to be > quite buggy currently, anyway... > > - Customizing: should be in the manual. Or an article about this would > be nice. But there's also some work going on on this, so it may be > subject to change. > > - Installing: Hopelessly outdated (3+4 are the same page). AFAIK, people > usually know what to do with a file they download, anyway - and all the > other info is already in the FAQ. Or which info on that page should be > transferred? I might have overlooked something... > > >>> Could you keep track of the kind of info you are looking up, so we can >>> maybe find a way to include the main components on the website? >> >> I don't remember everything I've looked up, but once was info about the >> new Symbols dialog. And if the new manual comes out pretty soon, I >> won't have to go to the wiki anymore. >> This is a whole other subject, but I wish we had like a team to >> write the manual, so it wouldn't all be on 1 person's shoulders! I >> mean, Inkscape really should have it's own "official manual", rather >> than an "official" manual. And imo, the official manual should be on >> the website. But again, that's another subject. > > - Yes, I know. I feel like you do, but I can't start a team for this > myself. We once had a team who collaboratively wrote a manual, but that > effort seems to have died... I don't know why, I wasn't around. > > What I know is that Tav actually does not make money with the manual, > and would be delighted if some day, there were an effort made to make a > real, freely usable, user manual (well, I asked him about the background > of the 'official' manual being restrictively licenced, and he actually > took the time to explain to me.) > > The difficulty is it would have to start from the FOSS manual and it > can't copy anything from Tav's guide. > (when I started using Inkscape, I found Tav's guide quite difficult to > understand - it was far too technical - so that might not be so bad, in > the end) > And of course, we'd need at least 10 people who want to help with that, > who have the time for this, who have a good command of English, and who > actually have the knowledge to do so. > And we'd need someone who knows how to write documentation to guide them. > This seems unrealistic to me, currently, judging from overall user > activity on mailing lists etc. ... > We should open up a 'job wall' somewhere... there a so many vacancies ;) > > Kind regards, > Maren > >> >> Thanks, >> brynn >> >> -------------------------------------------------- >> From: "Maren Hachmann" <maren@...68...> >> Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 12:46 PM >> To: "Brynn" <brynn@...78...>; <inkscape-docs(a)lists.sourceforge.net&gt; >> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-docs] more prominent link to the wiki? >> >>> Hi Brynn, >>> >>> Am 19.06.2015 um 05:19 schrieb Brynn: >>>> Hi Maren, >>>> Yes, I understand that the intent for the wiki is more for >>>> developers. I didn't mean there should be a more prominent link for >>>> users to get to the wiki. I meant for developers, but others could >>>> use >>>> it too. >>> >>> - Mmh. For devs, the link isn't too hidden, I think: >>> https://inkscape.org/en/develop/ , fourth paragraph >>> (but also new devs should not rely on the info in the Wiki being up to >>> date). >>> >>> I usually just type 'wik' into my browser's address line, and then >>> autocompletion kicks in... >>> >>>> I don't know. Maybe developers just don't need to go from >>>> website to wiki. Maybe it's just me. >>>> But fwiw, what I'm looking for most often is the Release Notes, >>> >>> - I think that for the next version we could try and get the Release >>> Notes on the website when they are finalized. They are an important >>> part >>> of the documentation. This will also make it easier for our >>> translators' >>> team (who have access to website editing, but most don't have wiki >>> privileges) to translate them (translating Release Notes is a difficult >>> task by itself...). >>> >>>> Roadmap, >>> >>> - The Roadmap is being changed by devs all the time - and users should >>> not rely on it too much - but unfortunately, they often take it by the >>> letter, and are then disappointed... It's good info, but I'm a bit >>> hesitant to put it on the website. Is there a place on the website >>> which >>> could profit from a direct link to the Roadmap? >>> (maybe: The Next Release, FAQ, Features?) >>> >>>> and I often search the wiki while trying to answer support >>>> questions from forums. >>> >>> - You're quite hardy :) >>> I've internally categorized most of the Wiki pages as 'outdated' or >>> 'describing a plan, but not necessarily the real implementation'... >>> Could you keep track of the kind of info you are looking up, so we can >>> maybe find a way to include the main components on the website? >>> >>>> And for the latter, this is especially more for >>>> the new-in-0.91-features, because the manual hasn't been updated, >>>> and a >>>> lot of the new features are explained in the wiki. Once the manual is >>>> updated, I won't be in the wiki as much. >>> >>> - Tav told me he'd take care of this soon. But it's an awful lot of >>> work >>> (so many new features ;) ), so it may still take a while. >>> >>>> (There IS a lot of user-focused stuff in the wiki! I >>>> started to >>>> work on some of it, thinking maybe it could be updated and moved to >>>> the >>>> website, like I did with the faq. But almost all of it is over my >>>> head. >>>> I did make a list of the ones that are referenced in the faq, >>>> hoping to at least get that much transferred over. >>> >>> - Could you share that list? >>> >>> But afaik, no one >>>> has updated them or moved to the website.) >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Maren >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> brynn >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------- >>>> From: "Maren Hachmann" <maren@...68...> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 12:26 PM >>>> To: <inkscape-docs(a)lists.sourceforge.net&gt; >>>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-docs] more prominent link to the wiki? >>>> >>>>> Am 17.06.2015 um 07:31 schrieb Brynn: >>>>>> Hi Friends, >>>>>> This might be just me, but I find myself needing to browse >>>>>> from >>>>>> the >>>>>> website to the wiki fairly often. Of course I have a >>>>>> Favorite/Bookmark >>>>>> for >>>>>> it. But I wonder if a link to the wiki should be easier to find on >>>>>> the >>>>>> website? >>>>> >>>>> Hi Brynn, >>>>> >>>>> depends a bit on what the Wiki is intended for. >>>>> Is it for learning? >>>>> >>>>> I understood it more to be a site where the devs exchange their >>>>> ideas. >>>>> Most of the info there is outdated, and not regularly refreshed, or >>>>> only >>>>> important to developers - beside the Release notes, which live there, >>>>> because we didn't carry them over to the website after they were >>>>> finished (and which the devs may find easier to edit in the Wiki >>>>> than on >>>>> the web site - at least it allows to insert SVG as images...). >>>>> >>>>> What are your use cases? >>>>> Which of the info in the Wiki should be accessible more easily? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Maren >>>>> >>>>>> Usually I open the Learn page, and use the link near the >>>>>> bottom >>>>>> of >>>>>> the page. Anyway, just a thought I wanted to share. And I wonder >>>>>> what >>>>>> others might think about it. Maybe that Learn page link is enough? >>>>>> >>>>>> All best, >>>>>> brynn >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Inkscape-docs mailing list >>>>>> Inkscape-docs(a)lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-docs >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Inkscape-docs mailing list >>>>> Inkscape-docs(a)lists.sourceforge.net >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-docs >>>> >>>> >>> >