On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 08:47 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Sun, 2007-04-29 at 14:22 -0700, Francis Earl wrote:
Just looking briefly at the "Getting Started" page, I believe a few improvements could be made. It's overtone is very professional, which is intimidating.
In absence of a good, fixed voice for Fedora Docs, we default to the traditional tech writing mode. Setting a new tone is a good idea, but a lot more work than you may realize. If you rewrite it to sound like you, then you have to work up a set of rules that others can follow to make sure they can write in a similar style.
What happens in a Wiki is that people write in their personal style, and in trying to wrangle them all all together, all personality is erased. It would be great if we had a set of "voice instructions" that we could use when writing and editing. Something that is easy to use like this is:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/WikiEditing#Marking_Technical_Terms
Fortunately, we also have a Style Guide which documents grammar, usage, etc. for use in the official docs:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/StyleGuide
I also think things like Graphic User Interface and Window Manager should provide links to wikipedia so the user can learn more about the topic if they wish. Wikipedia is provided in the Free Content bookmarks folder in Fedora 7t4, so I don't think that would be an issue? I think the wiki is the wrong place to try and explain such things though.
Sure, good idea, we should save ourselves explaining things that don't matter. We can't actually pull in Wikipedia content (wrong license), but we can link to them.
And don't forget that we can also update our Jargon Buster with these terms, including a citation to Wikipedia, et al.
Also, I don't see a way to upload images? There is a saying "a picture tells a thousand words", and I believe it's true.
Yes, but a screenshot is not a picture. It is mainly a bunch of pixels that have no meaning (>80%) and a few pixels that do have meaning.
When an image is a diagram, it is useful. A screenshot that is converted into a diagram is useful. However, it has to be worth the extra hassle to translated.
SVG files give us a pathway to translation. Raster graphics (screenshots) require all translators to perfectly recreate the graphic in their native language. GUIs often change right up to the end, so *every single screenshot* has to be double-checked for accuracy just before release, then any fixed, and all translators have to update their versions. FWIW, I've seen this in action, and it's a PITA.
For 90%+ of cases where a screenshot is used, a short piece of text can be used instead. That is much easier to translate and correct when the GUI is changed.
And I can tell you, also, from several iterations of the Installation Guide that the "we'll just get translators to reproduce it" model doesn't work well. I completely trust in their ability to do it, but the amount of effort and time it takes simply puts it at a much lower priority than doing string translations. Thus, we use the guideline to avoid screenshots whenever possible.
It's interesting that in printed books, I believe very much in visual learning -- the Head First book series is an excellent example of how to do this well. That approach, however, requires *MAJOR* efforts in layout and design that we can't reasonably reproduce with a wiki or DocBook. So instead, we go for the most effective and efficient approach, which still conveys maximum information to the reader: clear, simple writing.
I don't even see a way to add images though? Screenshots (of a particular section of relevance on the desktop) would greatly clarify what things say, and provide an air of confidence for the user "I must be doing it right, it looks the same".
For example, in the DUG, I think the screenshot slices of the desktop are quite useful. This is because it is hard to describe something that is entirely graphical and can be customized to move around on the desktop.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/DesktopUserGuide/Tour
Well, hmmm ... the part I liked there was removed, which showed the various toolbar/elements of the desktop along with an explanation of their usage. The current version, which shows a full desktop and then explains around it, I find more confusing.
Heh, heh ... now that this has come up on list a few times recently (refer to the archives for more of the same), maybe I need to write all this up at DocsProject/Screenshots. :)
How about in the Style Guide? Currently this is in the Documentation Guide, but if it doesn't fit we could yank it from there and link to it instead.