Am Mittwoch, 26. Juli 2006 23:55 schrieb Gregory Pittman: > Actually, it's not such a bad idea. The content of the tutorial > product/project is arbitrary. why not have it represent something > actually useful? We certainly don't want pages of Lorem ipsum (yuck). > And, (sorry for being a neurologist) there is the subliminal factor in > teaching about Scribus while you manipulate text that tells you about > Scribus features.
Greg, sorry for being no neurologist, but wouldn't it be a bit confusing for newbies to re-create a document by following the tutorial's instructions, while at the same concentrating on the content (a Scribus tutorial)? New users should, IMHO, be able to read a tutorial and at the same time follow the steps described in it. I don't insist on my Rembrandt files, even Allen's "underwater weaving" would be fine, but I think it's really important to draw a line between the content and the layout, which is so very basic for understanding DTP. A matryoshka-doll-like tutorial seems to be the wrong approach from a didcatical point of view. > > For that matter, it doesn't need to be a single, monolithic project > either. At the core (initial page) there can be a simple but not too > simple document, which along the way, as Wikis do, have the opportunity > for a little side trip into more advanced, complex, perhaps esoteric > Scribus features. This way you don't overwhelm the initiate, and you > retain the interest of the returnee or the more experienced person. > > These side trips also bring up opportunities for many to contribute > their particular feature without a series of dueling edits. > > Greg Cheers, Christoph
