Thank you, Gabriel,
for your extensive summary of the possible problems with changing the UI.
I might add that in the case of the application help this gets localized
into many languages. This calls for some work by the translators, who
either translate for OOo in their rare spare time, or who will have to
get paid in case of StarOffice.
But then, necessary changes to the UI need to be done sometime, and they
must get documented, too. It can be discussed if a 3.1 release is the
right time for such UI changes, or if a 4.0 release would be better.
Uwe
On 10/20/08 15:37, Gabriel Gurley wrote:
I have to agree with Jean that the changes are usability improvements
for the program, so I think in the long run it's worth it.
In the short-run, however, I do have a number of concerns as it relates
to the documentation side of things. As an example, in the case of my
documentation, I would have to make the changes in a number of places:
This would include:
1. changes to the instructions itself within the lessons.
2. would have to re-create some screenshots / illustrations that
coincide with the instruction changes.
3. not only would I need to apply those changes to the printed
documentation itself, but also make the same changes to the manuscript
downloads and to the Moodle Course Package docuemntation as well.
4. in the case of the Moodle Course Package, not only would the lesson
documentation and its related illustrations need to be changed, but
quiz/ exam questions found within the package would also have to be
reviewed and changed as well.
5. in the case of making the changes to the printed documentation, the
presses already have the current edition printed and available. So the
copies that are already in distribution would contain instructions that
wouldn't reflect the changes being proposed for 3.1
6. if the changes in question for 3.1 result in having to add additional
pages to the document, then I would have to consider that to be a new
edition in the eyes of distributors / printing presses and, therefore, a
new ISBN number would have to be assigned and the current edition would
have to be taken out of circulation. This usually takes about 30-60
days in itself for the process to take place, even after all of the
documentation changes have taken place and sent to the presses.
Most of the points mentioned above would not only affect the
documentation I have created, but for other authors as well who have
either already released documentation or are perhaps in the final stages
of releasing documentation from the presses to book retailers /
distributors.
Moreover, I also have to consider the end-users who utilize my
documentation as well. My book is utilized predominately by education
institutions who have adopted the documentation for use in classes. If
the changes proposed are made in 3.1, then what happens to these schools
is that the books they just bought or adopted (in the case of paperback
adoptions) or electronic copies they made photocopies of are now
obselete in a matter of a very short period of time. They would then
either:
a) have to buy new copies of the book (not a very good option at all for
those who have just chosen to adopt OOo 3.0 and have purchased paperback
copies for use in the classroom)
b) have to make new photocopies of the updated documentation for
distributing in classes (again, will cost additional money, time and
hassle for instructors),
c) students who purchased new paperback copies (because of it being the
new edition related to OOo 3.0) all of a sudden couldn't resell it at
the end of the semester because I may have to release another edition to
reflect the changes in 3.1 (see #6 above), or
d) instructors would have to improvise their instruction in the
classroom around the differences in 3.1 and the documentation they have,
which may result in turning off some instructors and administrators who
have recently decided to adopt OOo in lieu of other office productivity
suites (which has happened, by the way).
So ideally, from an author's point-of-view, it is best to make
fundamental changes to software such as menu changes, interface changes,
etc. part of a major software update release (ie version 3.0 4.0, 5.0,
etc.).
Adding new features in point releases are okay; an author's
documentation may not include details about a new feature, but at least
the instruction provided in an author's documentation isn't obselete
like it is when menu changes or interface changes are made in point
releases.
However, if such changes are made before then, it would take many
authors, including myself, about 90-120 days to have those changes be
reflected in our documentation and would need that amount of time before
the release of the OOo software update in order to make available
doumentation that accurately reflects those changes.
Hope this information helps and provides some insight from a document
creator's point-of-view.
Best regards,
Gabriel Gurley
Author, "A Conceptual Guide to OpenOffice.org 3"
Quoting Uwe Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi,
some authors of OOo documentation may have read or missed the following
discussion in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list.
Max, who is a very respected code contributor (we all must thank him
for the fine new notes in Writer) wants to change the names and
positions of some odd menu entries:
http://ux.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=2360
or read
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/MinorMenuAdjustments
for the facts without discussion.
This is certainly a welcome change, but it may have quite an impact on
existing or new documentation. What do you - as the authors of OOo 3.x
documentation - think about the changes?
Uwe
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Technical Writer
StarOffice - Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Hamburg, Germany
http://documentation.openoffice.org/
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation
http://blogs.sun.com/oootnt
http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
