http://chandlerproject.org/Projects/Vision
Thanks for the detailed feedback Davor. I've incorporated a number of
your suggestions...See in-line.
On Jul 25, 2007, at 12:25 AM, Davor Cubranic wrote:
I think having an intro paragraph that lays out the vision at a very
high level would be even more useful to get people to read it. Kind of
like an abstract for a paper. (Which is all that most people actually
read in a typical academic paper. :-)
Basic, yet brilliant. I've added an intro that pretty much starts out
the way you suggested.
Next, in the body of paper, I was somewhat disoriented by "context
switches" between problems with the data flow, the lack of support for
iterative information processing, and multi-faceted organization of
information.
Yes, I can see now that the structure was a bit uneven, especially
because I formatted the 'Problem Definition' paragraphs incorrectly.
See more below...
Since there are multiple points, they should be enumerated
right from the beginning, and be easily visible in the structure of
the
document. E.g.:
Who - the user
- the first half and the last two paragraphs of the current "preview
target users" section (leave their problems for the next section)
Looking at the target users section again, I see where you're coming
from about keeping it clean and free of their workflow issues. But, I
think the workflows are actually really handy for helping to
concretize the target users...sort of these are the symptoms of our
target user. If you suffer from them, you're probably a target user.
I think just the titles 'Project Manager' for example doesn't quite
capture the target user. It's simultaneously too broad and too narrow.
What - the problem
- methodology (what's in the current "Design approach" section?)
- pull together all problems, organized in say three main areas
1.
2.
3.
How - the Chandler solution
- hit every point from the previous secton and show how Chandler
fixes/will fix what's wrong with present tools
1.
2.
3.
(This is just an example, the most important thing is to have a strong
structure that makes it easy to grasp the crucial points.)
Yup, agree.
I've re-formatted the 'Diagnosis' section
I think the issues are gnarly enough that the 'solutions' don't line
up so very neatly with the 'problems', at least for the information
management bit. I've separated out the 'Collaboration' stuff into a
more clearly defined set of sections. The Collaboration discussion
does seem to fall out neatly the way you propose above.
Another advantage of this organization is that Who-What-How
sections can
each go on a separate page. (While it would make sense to have them
together in a downloadable PDF version linked somewhere visible
here, I
believe that it's nicer to read web pages in smaller, more
self-contained and easily digestible chunks.)
I'd like to keep the entire document on one page, even on the wiki. I
think there is something useful about being able to at-a-glance,
scroll down the entire document and do a high-level reading of the
document...as well as easily scroll up and down and essentially read
in circles. For all-text documents I agree, it's better to paginate,
but when there are visual anchors, I find it useful to allow people
to read and re-read out of order.
Also, I think it's great to have a few "reality checks" and note,
as you
do now, where Chandler is in the Preview wrt. the vision, vs. what's
planned Post-Preview (but pre-1.0?), vs. longer-term horizon
(asymptotically approaching the vision's goal :-). It would probably
make sense to keep these piecemeal in the How section as a relevant
feature comes up. (Maybe pulled out into sidebars?)
Yes. I'm hoping that the links to areas and screenshots in the Get
Started Guide will serve this function. I do want to be careful about
not distracting from the main flow of the document with too many
caveats so the sidebar idea sounds ideal...not sure how far I'll get
with wiki formatting though.
Also, there would need to be a conclusion -- what's currently
in "Chandler as a system" would probably work fine for that.
I've added a link to the current Features list in the 'abstract' at
the top, so hopefully that will help as well.
Our other alternative is to go with something list this:
http://chandlerproject.org/Projects/NutshellCartoons
Less concrete and less explicit, more a series of teasers that you
can
dig into more if you want to.
These are cool and contain a wealth of information, but it's much
harder
for an outsider to pull them into a coherent vision on first read when
they're organized like that. Not that they don't have a place in the
wiki, and at least some of them them could be linked to from the
Vision
page as further reading. (Either at strategic points in the text, or
collectively at the end.)
I hope this is helpful,
Extremely helpful! Thanks Davor.
Davor
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "General" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/general
