On date Sunday 2024-01-21 19:35:01 +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote: > Quoting Stefano Sabatini (2024-01-21 19:22:35) > > On date Sunday 2024-01-21 18:43:36 +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > > Quoting Stefano Sabatini (2024-01-20 12:32:42) > > [...] > > > > When you present an example you usually start with an explanation > > > > (what it does) and then present the command, not the other way around. > > > > > > I don't, neither does most literature I can recall. Typically you first > > > present a thing, then explain its structure. Explaning the structure of > > > something the reader has not seen yet is backwards, unnatural, and hard > > > to understand. > > > > I still don't understand what "literature" you are referring to. > > Various manuals and textbooks I've read. > > > If you see most examples in the FFmpeg docs they are in the form: >
> Our documentation is widely considered to be somewhere between atrocious > and unusable nah, it's not so bad, also this applies to most documentation Besides FFmpeg is possibly the most sophisticated existing toolkit in terms of features/configuration, so this is somehow expected (at least if you expect a tutorial rather than a reference). > (and sometimes actively misleading), so the fact that it > does something in a specific way does not at all mean that it's a good > idea. So what do you propose instead? The fact that it is not perfect does not mean that everything is bad. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".