Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Open Help Conference
On 3/25/2011 6:33 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Shaun McCance wrote: Hi all, I'm organizing the Open Help Conference this June. It's a gathering of documentation and support people from various open source and community projects. There are already participants who contribute to projects like Firefox, GNOME, and Ubuntu. http://openhelpconference.com/ There are presentations the first day, but with plenty of time between for hallways conversations. The second day has open discussions, ending with an open collaboration session where you can get input from peers and professional tech writers. We also have rooms availabe after the conference for team sprints, if you'd like to use the opportunity to do some face-to-face collaboration. I'd love to see some people from LibreOffice at the conference, and hear about what you're doing and how well you're transitioning from the old OpenOffice world to the more community-oriented LibreOffice. Thanks, Shaun McCance Community Help Expert | Open Help Conference http://syllogist.net/ | http://openhelpconference.com/ This sounds like a good opportunity, if anyone can get there. Do we have any active documenters/ help producers in North America? And would TDF be willing to pay the US$100 registration fee and travel costs for one or more attendees? I can't come from Australia; it's too far, too expensive, and I already have other plans for early June. Hal I'm in central Texas, but I don't know if I could be useful enough. I'm too new at all this! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Calc Guide status & question re angle brackets in paths
On 3/25/2011 6:27 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 3:05 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 3/19/2011 8:20 PM, Hal Parker wrote: I am now turning my attention to the Calc Guide, which Barbara has rebranded from the OOo version. I've started replacing images and checking for info that is incorrect for LibO. One question, regarding the path indicators (angle bracket> versus arrow): the consensus awhile ago appeared to be that retaining the angle bracket was preferable to changing it to an arrow, but that it wasn't worth the effort at this point to revert the Writer Guide and Getting Started. However, working now on a new book, I would like to retain the angle brackets. What say the rest of you? Hal I'd say it's probably easier just to leave the arrows for the Calc Guide, and revisit this for the other docs or later upgrades to the documentation -- there's plenty of stuff to be done, like the style usage work, where this could be part of the whole process. Sound right? While I am going through the chapters replacing screenshots, it takes less than 2 minutes (while the chapter is being worked on anyway) to do a search and replace to restore the angle brackets, so IMO "easier" isn't an issue in this case. If the chapters did not need other work, then I'd agree with you. Hal Besides being arrows, they're also in OOoComputerCode style (Liberation Sans Mono), and they'd be better back in OOoMenuPath. That would take longer than the simple F&R, right? I'm not sure whether the angle bracket in mono would go well with the rest in straight Liberation Sans. Anyway, the three main books being consistent (Getting Started, Writer Guide, Calc Guide) may have some value, and the arrow work was already done. I think there are plans to do some serious style application work, and more real content development, once the first wave of books has gotten out, so that would be another opportunity. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Calc Guide status & question re angle brackets in paths
On 3/19/2011 8:20 PM, Hal Parker wrote: I am now turning my attention to the Calc Guide, which Barbara has rebranded from the OOo version. I've started replacing images and checking for info that is incorrect for LibO. One question, regarding the path indicators (angle bracket> versus arrow): the consensus awhile ago appeared to be that retaining the angle bracket was preferable to changing it to an arrow, but that it wasn't worth the effort at this point to revert the Writer Guide and Getting Started. However, working now on a new book, I would like to retain the angle brackets. What say the rest of you? Hal I'd say it's probably easier just to leave the arrows for the Calc Guide, and revisit this for the other docs or later upgrades to the documentation -- there's plenty of stuff to be done, like the style usage work, where this could be part of the whole process. Sound right? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Barbara D: Writer Guide Master Doc chapter
On 2/22/2011 11:44 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 2/21/2011 6:36 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 2/21/2011 6:12 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 2/17/2011 10:46 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 14:20 +1000, Hal Parker wrote: Barbara, in your review of the Writer Guide chapter on master documents, in the section on splitting a document into master and subdocs, youleft a note to say that you did not see the "separated by:" list on the Name and Path of Master Document dialog box; all you saw was "template". I have now tested the instructions in that section on Windows XP, Windows 7, Mac OS X, and Ubuntu 10.10. On Windows (XP and 7) and Mac, the dialog box shows a "separated by:" list, as described; however, on Ubuntu the list was called "Styles". I'm trying to work out what you could have done to give a different result. Perhaps you'd like to try it again? Actually, if you have selected "Use LibreOffice Open/Save dialogs" in the Options, you'll see "separated by:" in Name and Path of Master Document dialog on Ubuntu, too. --Jean Oh. Er, yes. Silly me. Thanks! That also explains why some other dialogs looked different from what I was expecting. And it's a good reminder to all of us to check/tick/select/enable/whatever that option. Hal Sorry, this one got lost in the flood of mail. It didn't occur to me that this option was involved, I've fixed it now. I don't know if all the dialog differences I saw were from this, but I don't think all of them were in any way related to load/save actions. That option appears to affect many dialogs that are not apparently related to load/save actions (though they might be, from a behind-the-scenes programming POV. However, in this case it only affected the appearance of the dialog, not the wording of the fields and drop-down lists (except on Linux), so you should have seen "separated by" regardless. Hal Maybe "should have" -- but didn't. I've repeated the process with the option set, and it worked; without the option, no separate files were created at all (unless they went to some temporary location different from where I sent the master doc, which was to the Desktop for easy temporary access). Not only the wording was different, but the underlying function. This sounds like something that is worth trying to diagnose, because it worked fine for me without the "use LibO dialog" option being selected. On Mac and Win, I saw the expected field name (separated by) on the dialog, and the files were created as they were supposed to. On Ubuntu, the field name was different (Styles) but the function still worked. Hal I'm using Win7 Home Premium and a pretty vanilla Classic-type setup, and here (assuming the clipboard paste works) is what I see when I don't use LibO dialogs: And here it is with the LibO dialogs: When I tried today with the native dialogs, it worked (once I put in a name, until then it just hung) -- last time it created an odm file on the desktop but no visible odt parts, although the whole document was visible and not obviously different. With the LibO dialogs, everything works as expected. I can't explain why the different behavior, I'm still using the same 3.3.0-Build 4 version of LibO (not sure whether to go to the 3.3.0 final or the 3.3.1 RC ) So I guess the earlier behavior just has to be chalked up as a fluke. :-( Ah, well, pasted graphics don't work, either. I can supply them elsewhere if anybody cares, just tell me where it would be best to save them. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] RESOLVED Re: Problem with List box form control properties
On 2/21/2011 8:33 PM, TomW wrote: On 2011-02-21 12:39, Alexander Thurgood wrote: Le 21/02/11 18:09, David Nelson a écrit : Hi all, Anyway, my experience with bug reports is that they *do* get attended to - and fairly quickly - but still it can take a few days before someone checks it out, especially if it doesn't fall in the showstopper class. Also, the reports that get the most attention are those that are filed with a lot of detail (screenshots, step-by-step explanations, etc.). I have confirmed that I have been unable to get this to work, without binding to a data source (which I haven't tried) - with NeoOffice 3.1.2 Patch 4, OOo 3.2.1, OOo 3.3.0 final, and LibO 3.3.1 RC2. Either we are all doing something wrong (like Barbara I tried every which way imaginable to get the list entered), or else the functionality has ceased to work correctly. FYI, binding listboxes to datafield lists of results via listboxes has broken, been repaired, broken again with successive versions of OOo from 3.1.x through 3.2.1 to 3.3.x. I haven't tried my old db forms recently to see if the problem has come back again. Alex Hello To create a list for a 'Listbox' or Combobox': On 'Control' toolbar select 'Design View' Right Click on Listbox control: Select 'Control' 'General' tab Scroll down to 'List Entries' Type in first entry. e.g. Tom Shift Enter Type in next entry. e.g. Ted etc... This builds the list. Tom LibreOffice 3.3.0 OOO330m17 (Build:3) libreoffice-build 3.3.0.1 on Vista Thanks, TomW! I just added the old instructions to the bug, now I'll update the bug report with the solution. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Barbara D: Writer Guide Master Doc chapter
On 2/21/2011 6:36 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 2/21/2011 6:12 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 2/17/2011 10:46 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 14:20 +1000, Hal Parker wrote: Barbara, in your review of the Writer Guide chapter on master documents, in the section on splitting a document into master and subdocs, youleft a note to say that you did not see the "separated by:" list on the Name and Path of Master Document dialog box; all you saw was "template". I have now tested the instructions in that section on Windows XP, Windows 7, Mac OS X, and Ubuntu 10.10. On Windows (XP and 7) and Mac, the dialog box shows a "separated by:" list, as described; however, on Ubuntu the list was called "Styles". I'm trying to work out what you could have done to give a different result. Perhaps you'd like to try it again? Actually, if you have selected "Use LibreOffice Open/Save dialogs" in the Options, you'll see "separated by:" in Name and Path of Master Document dialog on Ubuntu, too. --Jean Oh. Er, yes. Silly me. Thanks! That also explains why some other dialogs looked different from what I was expecting. And it's a good reminder to all of us to check/tick/select/enable/whatever that option. Hal Sorry, this one got lost in the flood of mail. It didn't occur to me that this option was involved, I've fixed it now. I don't know if all the dialog differences I saw were from this, but I don't think all of them were in any way related to load/save actions. That option appears to affect many dialogs that are not apparently related to load/save actions (though they might be, from a behind-the-scenes programming POV. However, in this case it only affected the appearance of the dialog, not the wording of the fields and drop-down lists (except on Linux), so you should have seen "separated by" regardless. Hal Maybe "should have" -- but didn't. I've repeated the process with the option set, and it worked; without the option, no separate files were created at all (unless they went to some temporary location different from where I sent the master doc, which was to the Desktop for easy temporary access). Not only the wording was different, but the underlying function. This sounds like something that is worth trying to diagnose, because it worked fine for me without the "use LibO dialog" option being selected. On Mac and Win, I saw the expected field name (separated by) on the dialog, and the files were created as they were supposed to. On Ubuntu, the field name was different (Styles) but the function still worked. Hal I'm using Win7 Home Premium and a pretty vanilla Classic-type setup, and here (assuming the clipboard paste works) is what I see when I don't use LibO dialogs: And here it is with the LibO dialogs: When I tried today with the native dialogs, it worked (once I put in a name, until then it just hung) -- last time it created an odm file on the desktop but no visible odt parts, although the whole document was visible and not obviously different. With the LibO dialogs, everything works as expected. I can't explain why the different behavior, I'm still using the same 3.3.0-Build 4 version of LibO (not sure whether to go to the 3.3.0 final or the 3.3.1 RC ) So I guess the earlier behavior just has to be chalked up as a fluke. :-( -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Barbara D: Writer Guide Master Doc chapter
On 2/21/2011 6:12 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 7:07 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 2/17/2011 10:46 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 14:20 +1000, Hal Parker wrote: Barbara, in your review of the Writer Guide chapter on master documents, in the section on splitting a document into master and subdocs, youleft a note to say that you did not see the "separated by:" list on the Name and Path of Master Document dialog box; all you saw was "template". I have now tested the instructions in that section on Windows XP, Windows 7, Mac OS X, and Ubuntu 10.10. On Windows (XP and 7) and Mac, the dialog box shows a "separated by:" list, as described; however, on Ubuntu the list was called "Styles". I'm trying to work out what you could have done to give a different result. Perhaps you'd like to try it again? Actually, if you have selected "Use LibreOffice Open/Save dialogs" in the Options, you'll see "separated by:" in Name and Path of Master Document dialog on Ubuntu, too. --Jean Oh. Er, yes. Silly me. Thanks! That also explains why some other dialogs looked different from what I was expecting. And it's a good reminder to all of us to check/tick/select/enable/whatever that option. Hal Sorry, this one got lost in the flood of mail. It didn't occur to me that this option was involved, I've fixed it now. I don't know if all the dialog differences I saw were from this, but I don't think all of them were in any way related to load/save actions. That option appears to affect many dialogs that are not apparently related to load/save actions (though they might be, from a behind-the-scenes programming POV. However, in this case it only affected the appearance of the dialog, not the wording of the fields and drop-down lists (except on Linux), so you should have seen "separated by" regardless. Hal Maybe "should have" -- but didn't. I've repeated the process with the option set, and it worked; without the option, no separate files were created at all (unless they went to some temporary location different from where I sent the master doc, which was to the Desktop for easy temporary access). Not only the wording was different, but the underlying function. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Barbara D: Writer Guide Master Doc chapter
On 2/21/2011 3:07 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 2/17/2011 10:46 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Jean Hollis Weberwrote: On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 14:20 +1000, Hal Parker wrote: Barbara, in your review of the Writer Guide chapter on master documents, in the section on splitting a document into master and subdocs, youleft a note to say that you did not see the "separated by:" list on the Name and Path of Master Document dialog box; all you saw was "template". I have now tested the instructions in that section on Windows XP, Windows 7, Mac OS X, and Ubuntu 10.10. On Windows (XP and 7) and Mac, the dialog box shows a "separated by:" list, as described; however, on Ubuntu the list was called "Styles". I'm trying to work out what you could have done to give a different result. Perhaps you'd like to try it again? Actually, if you have selected "Use LibreOffice Open/Save dialogs" in the Options, you'll see "separated by:" in Name and Path of Master Document dialog on Ubuntu, too. --Jean Oh. Er, yes. Silly me. Thanks! That also explains why some other dialogs looked different from what I was expecting. And it's a good reminder to all of us to check/tick/select/enable/whatever that option. Hal Sorry, this one got lost in the flood of mail. It didn't occur to me that this option was involved, I've fixed it now. I don't know if all the dialog differences I saw were from this, but I don't think all of them were in any way related to load/save actions. BTW, since this may be a fairly common issue for people, there probably should be a Note in the text anywhere that option is required, right? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Barbara D: Writer Guide Master Doc chapter
On 2/17/2011 10:46 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Jean Hollis Weberwrote: On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 14:20 +1000, Hal Parker wrote: Barbara, in your review of the Writer Guide chapter on master documents, in the section on splitting a document into master and subdocs, youleft a note to say that you did not see the "separated by:" list on the Name and Path of Master Document dialog box; all you saw was "template". I have now tested the instructions in that section on Windows XP, Windows 7, Mac OS X, and Ubuntu 10.10. On Windows (XP and 7) and Mac, the dialog box shows a "separated by:" list, as described; however, on Ubuntu the list was called "Styles". I'm trying to work out what you could have done to give a different result. Perhaps you'd like to try it again? Actually, if you have selected "Use LibreOffice Open/Save dialogs" in the Options, you'll see "separated by:" in Name and Path of Master Document dialog on Ubuntu, too. --Jean Oh. Er, yes. Silly me. Thanks! That also explains why some other dialogs looked different from what I was expecting. And it's a good reminder to all of us to check/tick/select/enable/whatever that option. Hal Sorry, this one got lost in the flood of mail. It didn't occur to me that this option was involved, I've fixed it now. I don't know if all the dialog differences I saw were from this, but I don't think all of them were in any way related to load/save actions. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Re: Problem with List box form control properties
On 2/21/2011 11:39 AM, Alexander Thurgood wrote: Le 21/02/11 18:09, David Nelson a écrit : Hi all, Anyway, my experience with bug reports is that they *do* get attended to - and fairly quickly - but still it can take a few days before someone checks it out, especially if it doesn't fall in the showstopper class. Also, the reports that get the most attention are those that are filed with a lot of detail (screenshots, step-by-step explanations, etc.). I have confirmed that I have been unable to get this to work, without binding to a data source (which I haven't tried) - with NeoOffice 3.1.2 Patch 4, OOo 3.2.1, OOo 3.3.0 final, and LibO 3.3.1 RC2. Either we are all doing something wrong (like Barbara I tried every which way imaginable to get the list entered), or else the functionality has ceased to work correctly. FYI, binding listboxes to datafield lists of results via listboxes has broken, been repaired, broken again with successive versions of OOo from 3.1.x through 3.2.1 to 3.3.x. I haven't tried my old db forms recently to see if the problem has come back again. Alex Thanks, Alex, I really appreciate your attention to this! David, in this case the step-by-step process in the Writer Guide was cited, and some possible alternatives that were tried. I definitely agree with not just filing bug reports as a first step, but this seemed pretty clear-cut. I spent too many years as a software developer to be cavalier about bug reporting! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Problem with List box form control properties
On 2/19/2011 9:21 PM, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) Pass. Maybe it's worth asking this question on the devs list. They'd probably give you quick and helpful answers. David Nelson I submitted a bug report Jan 27: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33537 There's been no QA contact assigned yet, so apparently nothing is happening there. I haven't subscribed to the devs list (getting totally swamped with the ones I'm on already!). Hal, do you want to try that route? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Re: Writer Guide reviews
On 2/19/2011 4:43 PM, JDługosz wrote: I should point out that it doesn't have to be reviewed by one person or all at once. Anyone can flip through some of a chapter and double-check and accept all the typo fixes and formatting fixes, like stray letters that have been set as Times New Roman and wonky margins and misspelled words. Then put it back for someone else to look at later. If all the easy changes are reviewed and the only thing left are subject to discussion, then say so in the discussion thread. Note that things I've flagged as needing work are Comments, not Changes, so they will just sit there along for the ride until they are addressed. No need to take those out! As for the chapter dealing with Options, there are I think 2 or so places where "select" was used in a sentence that was really wrong. The rest of them, that I changed systematically, could be rejected until further discussion. But, is my rewording any worse than the original? --John As you've seen, there is some definite disagreement with the use of enable/disable, so I think those changes should probably be rejected for now while we get the first edition out. As for the more time-consuming changes, I think moving the files elsewhere with those comments, and "rejecting" them for now in the working set, would make it easier for the remaining reviewers (second proof and publication) to deal with the files. Probably not a biggie, though. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Re: Terminology: "selecting" is not enough!
On 2/18/2011 2:08 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Most documentation just confuses people so copying what they use probably wont help us. If we are going to look at documentation then a community edited one would be better, such as Ubuntu's but it would need to be regularly edited bynoobs rather than by geeks so perhaps Ubuntu's might be the best one to look at. Documentation for Windows apps tends to be the most confusing documentation for most people. "Greyed out" is a very geeky term. Admittedly low-level geeks but still not an average user. "Check" is kinda American. In English it tends to mean a method of payment or "to stop and look around" or as described. Tick the option might be a good way to say it but "UNtick" confuses people. Select means to to choose and that seems to make sense to people. Regards from Tom :) There seems to have been a decision long ago to use US-English terminology and spelling in the English documents. "Tick" is not used in the USA, except when talking about the blood-sucking insect! I think "not available" is fine instead of "grayed out" but not often needed anyway. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Re: Terminology: "selecting" is not enough!
On 2/17/2011 10:12 PM, Hal Parker wrote: What terms does the LibreOffice Help use? I thought that was our main terminology selection criterion. Hal The things we're discussing here are, I think, too context-sensitive to be readily searchable. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Re: Terminology: "selecting" is not enough!
On 2/17/2011 8:36 PM, JDługosz wrote: Barbara Duprey wrote: I have another problem with the enabled/disabled terminology -- I think it can easily be misunderstood as modifiable/unmodifiable (available/"grayed out"). This terminology is not in common use and I think it would be more confusing than helpful. Often "click" would be a reasonable substitute, but I have no problem with "select" and definitely prefer it for options in a list, for example. "select" is a synonym for "choose" and would be applicable for a drop-down combo-box or a set of radio buttons. But for checking/unchecking a check box, it is simply the wrong word. You are not selecting one option from all of them on the page; you are individually turning each option on or off. I agree, "disabled" is used for graying out a menu item, at least in the Win32 API. Popular use is just "grayed out" though. "clicking" a check box does not mean "ensure it is checked." The action of clicking it will probably toggle it. It is correct to click a button, though. How about "check"? Well, as a verb it means "hinder or restrain" so un-checking the Foo option will check the operation of Foo. Or it means "inspect" which will find out what it is; so you want to check your margin settings when setting up the page. So, don't use "check" to mean "mark" as a verb, in this context. The text in the document that you indicate by swiping the mouse is "The Selection", and you select some text before hitting the "bold" tool, for example. Selecting a named item from a combo-box is acceptable usage. I think we should focus on explaining what the various options indicate, rather than directing the user to click on them or saying that the effect would happen if the user enabled them. That is to be understood: just state the effect itself! I just went to another program at random: the context help for the Options page on Firefox reads, "When this option is enabled, Firefox will..." On Notepad++, "Check the option to ..." On XYplorer, some don't use a state or verb, just lists the meaning without preamble. Others use check/uncheck. 7-zip: on the file manager options, most of the time doesn't use any preamble. E.g. "Displays gridlines around items and subitems." Some uses of "select". The rest use "enabled". Foxit reader: on the printing help, "select" is followed by " from a list". No preamble for options explanations, but they are mostly radio buttons. So, I think there is lots of competition against "select" to mean "mark on". --John Good points, I'll incorporate this into the terminology document for us all to collaborate on. As I said, I don't expect a single answer here, it depends on the type of UI item involved, and sometimes on the behavior resulting from the choice. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Terminology: "selecting" is not enough!
That's OK, too, for checkbox (tickbox?) items, and maybe radio buttons. I think our terminology list needs to be updated and reviewed for the preferred way/ways to express this for the different UI items. I doubt there's a one-size-fits-all solution, though for me select comes closest. I'll put something together. Until we've agreed on the way we want to go, I don't think there should be any blanket changes to the existing terminology. On 2/16/2011 8:36 AM, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) I often use "activate" or "deactivate". Or, speaking more loosely, "switch on" and "switch off". David Nelson -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Terminology: "selecting" is not enough!
I have another problem with the enabled/disabled terminology -- I think it can easily be misunderstood as modifiable/unmodifiable (available/"grayed out"). This terminology is not in common use and I think it would be more confusing than helpful. Often "click" would be a reasonable substitute, but I have no problem with "select" and definitely prefer it for options in a list, for example. On 2/16/2011 5:20 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) I can totally agree with both points of view. I think select and de-select are probably easier to understand for more users although it is good to know why i felt uncomfortable about it! Enabled as the opposite of disabled is more uncomfortable politically since people in wheelchairs (a growing segment of society) are often said to be "disabled" despite the fact that there might only be a very limited number of things they can't do so well and many others they may do better. So, for a lot of office users the words might be uncomfortable. Select and de-select are safe even if i do still shudder a bit when de-select is used. Generally it is better to stick with a word that is used a lot in documentation even if it is blatantly wrong or used badly but consistently. Flagging it up by emailing the list but not changing the documentation is the best way of handling that sort of thing. My pet hate is the use of , before "and" or "but". It is bad English but good American so i have to try to stop myself from correcting it if i ever get around to doing any work. Oddly i prefer lower-case i to distinguish it from 1 or l and because i think it look friendlier despite it being wrong. Regards from Tom :) From: Jean Hollis Weber To: documentation@libreoffice.org Sent: Wed, 16 February, 2011 8:54:05 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Terminology: "selecting" is not enough! On Tue, 2011-02-15 at 23:59 -0800, JDługosz wrote: I noticed in the chapters I'm working on that often various things, such as all the items on the various pages of the Options dialog, it refers to "selecting" an option. In one place it was more noticeable in the user was directed to "select" something in the dialog. In that case, the terminology is clearly wrong. Selecting is not the same as operating on the widget. Selecting directs the attention to it, and another operation may then be performed, such as toggling a check box. I suppose in some context where the option itself is referred to in an imperative sense, saying the option is selected is OK and in fact I didn't notice initially. But you'd have to be careful about the wording of the sentence: are you being imperative or directing the user's action? It's more consistent and easier to just use a word that always works. To that end, I'm changing whatever descriptive phrase was used to "enabled" (antonym: "disabled"). That works for any type of control (check box, radio box, combo-box). I'm also trying to be more careful about wording things to reflect the desired state, rather than the action. I.e. clicking on an option doesn't necessarily enable it: it will toggle it, and you shouldn't click on it unless it was off before. So don't (just) direct the user to click on something to achieve an effect. Rather, the effect occurs when the option is enabled. And of course this is the very case in which merely selecting it doesn't do anything other than make the gui draw a selection rectangle around that item. From a programmer's POV, that's what "select" does. However, from an ordinary USER's POV, "select" turns it on and "deselect" turns it off. --Jean -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] First pass complete
On 2/14/2011 11:35 AM, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) I haven't looked, I must admit. Are you on Windows, Mac or Linux, Barbara? David Nelson I'm on Windows 7, David. There are probably going to be a large number of graphics replacements needed -- even beyond the OOo refs, there appear to be significant differences in icons, and so on. Gonna be fun, huh? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] First pass complete
On 2/13/2011 10:01 PM, David Nelson wrote: Hi Barbara, :-) If you look in the Various space, you'll see that there's a zip file containing screenshots done by Ron Faile... Maybe they can be useful? David Nelson As I understand it, those screenshots were for a couple of early Writer chapters -- and done with Windows, which we are not using now for legal reasons. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Re: Calc Chapter 2 Mysteries
On 2/14/2011 10:07 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 2/14/2011 6:11 AM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 03:34 -0800, JDługosz wrote: Jean Hollis Weber wrote: I have several tricks to get the pix visible again; if I find my notes, I'll post them. How about grabbing the Writer chapter I kicked back to drafts: One of them has serious missing image issues, and you could give that a shake and update. That copy of Writer Guide Chapter 1 is, in fact, missing images; they aren't just hidden. You can tell from the unusually small file size, and by unzipping the file and looking in the Pictures folder. I don't know what causes that to happen, although I've seen it a few times. David Nelson, how does one pull up an older version of a file from Alfresco? A lot of the pix in this chapter can be resurrected from the OOo counterpart or from Ron Faile's pix, but otherwise copying them from a previous version of the chapter might be faster and easier. I'll leave it to Hal or someone to do the actual restoration work. --Jean I'll do that. To answer that "how" question -- if you go to the version history and click on an older version, that should be the one downloaded. Done. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Re: Calc Chapter 2 Mysteries
On 2/14/2011 6:11 AM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 03:34 -0800, JDługosz wrote: Jean Hollis Weber wrote: I have several tricks to get the pix visible again; if I find my notes, I'll post them. How about grabbing the Writer chapter I kicked back to drafts: One of them has serious missing image issues, and you could give that a shake and update. That copy of Writer Guide Chapter 1 is, in fact, missing images; they aren't just hidden. You can tell from the unusually small file size, and by unzipping the file and looking in the Pictures folder. I don't know what causes that to happen, although I've seen it a few times. David Nelson, how does one pull up an older version of a file from Alfresco? A lot of the pix in this chapter can be resurrected from the OOo counterpart or from Ron Faile's pix, but otherwise copying them from a previous version of the chapter might be faster and easier. I'll leave it to Hal or someone to do the actual restoration work. --Jean I'll do that. To answer that "how" question -- if you go to the version history and click on an older version, that should be the one downloaded. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] First pass complete
OK, all the files for the Calc Guide are in the LibO format now. I'll start working on the screenshot verifications tomorrow, where I can. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] First pass complete -- except Chapter 1
I've finished the first pass for the Calc Guide, doing all the mechanical things, except that Chapter 1 is locked (by Jeremy, apparently). In addition to the previously mentioned blank index entries in Chapter 2, there were none at all in Chapter 8. One question that is belatedly occurring to me -- in the Acknowledgments section, the OOo chapters often had references to outside sources. I replaced the section with one referencing the OOo guide and the people who were on its contributors list, without the other acknowledgments. But should those be replicated as well? (Note that in some cases, this would force the TOC to a later page.) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Calc Chapter 2 Mysteries
In doing the initial pass on Chapter 2, I found some strange things. Many of the index entries were blank, and several figures were also missing (though the frame was sized to contain them). I checked against the OOo version on Alfresco, and there were blank index entries there, too. I could make a stab at them, but I'm not sure I should, that's not an area I've had experience with and it seems to be more an art than a science. :-) The missing figures were there in the OOo version, so I copied them and pasted into the LibO version. Each time, the paste resulted in having two copies of the figure. Ctrl-Z to undo the paste left a properly filled figure frame. Very strange! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Calc Guide
On 2/11/2011 3:03 PM, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 04:56, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: For some of the Calc Guide chapters, the ODFAuthors team has spreadsheet files with data that can be used to reproduce and check the examples given in the book. Later today I will look for these. Where should I put them on the Alfresco site? I haven't looked at it in awhile; are there spaces for writers' resources like that? It would be great if you could. "Company Home> LibreOffice> LibreOffice Documentation> various" would seem like a good place? David Nelson Sounds like the right place, and they would certainly help -- along with any guidance folks have been given about using them. A subfolder for them would probably be a good idea, too. There might be some good before/after extracts from them that would help explain the processes involved with screenshots, too. I found Chapter 9 very tough going, and I didn't even try to make sense of sections that didn't have any illustrations at all (quite a lot of that). -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Calc Guide
On 2/10/2011 9:08 PM, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) My 2 cents would be that it's probably more productive to just do what you can easily do, as you say, and then flag it as needing further attention (start a discussion on Alfresco, leave comments in the file, or whatever). David Nelson Thanks, David. Reduces my learning curve a lot! If nobody else gets around to it, I'll revisit this later, but for now I'll stick with the rest of the changes. I can't take the screenshots anyway, I'm on Windows. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Calc Guide
In trying to verify the screen shots in Chapter 9, I keep getting bogged down because I don't understand how to set things up and what is supposed to happen. When I can't see what the setup expects, or the screenshot is different, I don't know if I've done something wrong or there's really a problem. I'm inclined to think I can be most useful doing all the other branding changes, and leaving screenshot verification for somebody else. OK? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Template Thoughts and Update
On 2/9/2011 11:15 AM, David Nelson wrote: Hi John, :-) I had a look at your revised template. My 2 cents about things would be this: 1) One of the first things I'd like personally to see done would be to rename the OOo styles as LibO styles. I can't think of any reason for *not* doing this. Can anyone else think of any issues that would arise? I'd like to see the prefix end with something other than a capital letter -- the style name will be considerably easier to read that way. Lib, Lo, LibO-, or something else. But any name changes have to take the style hierarchy into account, and will force all the documents through a number of hoops to apply the right styles. I'm not sure what steps are required there, or how automatic they can be. 2) As regards the menu item separator, I'd opt for simplicity and just use ">". Using a field feels like an unnecessary complication to me, and I'm not so fond of the arrow in LiberationMono. I'd add a sentence to make this a convention. This is my preference, too; it's a very widely used technique. 3) There no clear conventions in the template about how to express keystrokes and keystroke sequences. My suggestion would be that we should add explanations about this. Again, I'd keep things simple and use "<>" to enclose all keystrokes, and I would't bother with special characters from WingDings, etc (for the Mac key, for instance). So we'd have: ,, + etc. However, it's true that the LibreOffice software itself doesn't do this. So what are people's thoughts on that? David Nelson The original template called for the OOoKeystroke style (Liberation Sans italic) for these, and the docs seem mostly to do that, with no angle brackets, and generally the label that appears on a standard keyboard (or an easily identifiable abbreviation like Bksp) -- but I'd agree that for things like the Mac command key and the Windows key I'd rather see the name, and brackets might help distinguish them. Having them all in angle brackets would be OK, but I'd prefer to + , for example, or better yet use square brackets, which are easier to type: [Ctrl-S]. I like Jean-Francois' Liberation Sans bold white-on-black style for them, but why not modify the existing style? In any case, adding an explanation to the template and to a Conventions component in the front matter would be good. I'd also like to see individual, readily identifiable style names for each type of referenced item. (I'll use Lib here as the prefix, but we should agree on one.) So : LibStyleName, LibFieldName, LibTabName, LibRefBookName, LibRefChapterName, LibRefHeading, LibDialogSection, LibButtonName, LibIconName, Then there's no confusion about what is preferred. Right now, they're mostly either OOoEmphasis or OOoStrongEmphasis, or done by direct application (ugh!). The template shows the things that the user clicks on as OOoMenuPath (bold), and the others as OOoEmphasis (italic), but this has been very inconsistently applied. Having the unambiguous names in the custom styles list would make it easy to apply the right style, and to make consistent changes for individual items as desired. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Template Thoughts and Update
On 2/7/2011 3:36 AM, John M. Dlugosz wrote: I updated LibO3_3_chapter_template.ott in various. I left change tracking on, so you can see what I proposed. * It already mentions that names of books and such should use the Emphasized style. Although I recall from grade school treating the names of books and the names of stories differently, I suppose for simplicity we can have just one. But, how would we hyperlink/cross reference the name of a different chapter, or worse yet, the name of a section within a different chapter? The decision was not to attempt any hyperlinking between chapters or books, at least not yet. I asked before. * The OTT file already notes that there are styles for Menu Paths and certain UI elements. I saw that they were not always used, and in fact did not notice such a style at first. The template admonishes against ever using Bold and Italic or other changes directly. Right, but it's been done anyway sometimes. It states that names of dialog boxes are in plain text. I changed that to refer to a new LibOUiItem style, which I defined to look exactly like the existing OooMenuPath style. Also, use the same treatment on all elements uniformly; buttons are not different from field labels, etc. Why not OOoDialogName (or LibDialogName)? There are lots of user interface items, let's be specific. Buttons, icons, dialog tabs, As for the appearance of the menu path separators, I made a User Field for that. Apparently, as far as I can tell, I can insert text but not associated complex formatting. Is there a fancier mechanism available? So, you need to use the field to insert whatever character and spacing is used, and also apply a character format to just that part. And, the whole of the substitution needs to work with a single style. At least, once that is done, you can change the arrow character, it spacing, and its style globally and it changes everywhere. Related question: does the template changer add-in pull in "User Fields"? Do they normally replicate in the manner of a style change when you open the document again? * What fonts are used? What fonts can/should we use? I noticed another stray bit of formatting in the OTT file: one word was in Bitstream Vera Serif. And in the chapter I looked at initially, the contents of a table is DejaVu Serif and the table headers in DejaVu Sans. Looking closely now, that is not the definition of the styles, so it was applied directly. Is there a tool to show what fonts are being used in the document? It would help identify stray formatting. Likewise, is there a way to identify or search for any ad-hoc formatting, as opposed to text that only gets its attributes from named styles? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Misc. Documentation Notes
On 2/6/2011 11:21 PM, John M. Dlugosz wrote: On 2/6/2011 12:58 PM, Barbara Duprey Barb-at-onr.com |LibreOffice Documentation Mailing List/Allow to home| wrote: I summarized what the template itself had to say about the use of styles (see Terminology and Styles under "various") -- I noted where I thought new styles looked useful. But the response I got about trying to do this level of update was basically, "Let's get the documents out first, and clean up this kind of detail later." Is that still the case? I don't know if anybody else has looked at that document yet, it will need updating when we focus more on this type of issue. I'll peruse what is under "various", if that's where such notes can be found. My two cents: If I'm proofing for any reason and notice such things, I'd like to be able to mark them. It doesn't mean it is necessary to be complete at this point or that such a mark has any effect in the output, but it will save having to look for them again later. So simply having a style defined would be helpful. We can decide on exactly how it should look, and make sure they are all covered, later. Until then, set a subtle effect for draft work and no difference from normal text on final output, so user's won't see it. I agree -- right now, they are generally either OOoEmphasis or OOoStrongEmphasis, but not consistently. The template itself covers it under Character Styles -- I just summarized in a table for easier reference. It might be a start. And I've done the same thing sometimes when I happened to notice that the readability was affected. It's just not something to get really serious about yet, apparently. Doing it right will certainly be time-consuming -- but there seem to be at least two of us who are champing at the bit to do it! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Misc. Documentation Notes
On 2/6/2011 6:29 AM, Rogerio Luz Coelho wrote: John ... I guess if you are already doing this, so you could start it the way you choose, later if we have a need to change it, we could always change your template. You already are working with building a template, so just keep on doing that, and if it ever needs changing we change the template. How about that? Rogerio 2011/2/6 John M. Dlugosz * Example, "covered in Chapter 1, Introducing Writer." Should the name of another chapter be in italics or something? Or even hyperlinked? Actually, it should have a character style assigned. I summarized what the template itself had to say about the use of styles (see Terminology and Styles under "various") -- I noted where I thought new styles looked useful. But the response I got about trying to do this level of update was basically, "Let's get the documents out first, and clean up this kind of detail later." Is that still the case? I don't know if anybody else has looked at that document yet, it will need updating when we focus more on this type of issue. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Completed Review of 0203WG3-WorkingWithText.odt
On 2/5/2011 5:09 PM, David Nelson wrote: Hi John, :-) On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 19:36, John M. Dlugosz wrote: I completed my pass of 0203WG3-WorkingWithText.odt, but I still cannot Update it! So please take heed that I have a lot of work on this that is in limbo, and don't edit the same file. You should be able to update it now. I would think that we should all have "Changes" and "Comments" visible when working on any of this stuff, as a matter of course. Yes, that would generally be the case. David Nelson I find that while I'm making changes, having recording on but not showing the change tracks makes it a lot easier to see what is actually being done -- especially when punctuation is involved. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Use of Nabble and/or Mail to Thread Discussion ?
On 2/6/2011 6:30 AM, drew wrote: On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 15:13 +0800, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) I'm CC'ing this to Drew Jensen, who originally set-up Nabble, and Christian Lohmaier. Hopefully, they will be able to provide further enlightenment... David Nelson On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 02:09, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 2/5/2011 2:00 AM, John M. Dlugosz wrote: I'm following these discussions and doing the documentation editing on my laptop, which is not my "main computer" where I have my email set up. I can't "Reply" using Nabble, since it says I don't have permission (why?). I can send out a top-level message to start a new thread by sending it to the list address, no problem. But how can I keep the discussion thread when I don't have the original message in an email program to "reply" to? Are you subscribed to the list, at least with -nomail? For some reason, this setup works differently than the OOo/ezmlm lists; I've seen some indications that people need the -nomail subscriptions here. PLEASE don't give advice without understanding. Hmm... I thought I was asking a question, not giving advice, and please note the "some indications" -- this was not intended as a positive statement that a -nomail subscription is required, just a reaction to some things I've seen here. What I hoped was that somebody who actually knew what was needed would respond (it had been several hours since the initial post), and you did. Thanks. From what you say below, it appears that Nabble initiates the subscription to the ML for the poster (once properly registered with the Nabble database), either with or without the -nomail option as specified by the poster, and that the poster does not need to do it directly (in the "normal" way, from a mail client). But the poster needs to complete the subscription process by replying to the confirmation message sent by the TDF/LibO list manager, so that no moderation is required. Am I understanding now? I did get a bit confused between "registration" and "subscription" -- these are normally not synonymous terms. -- OK the big difference is that Nabble maintains a separate archive and has it's own members database - so if you want to post via the Nabble archive you must have an account in the TDF specific nabble database. You must also be subscribed to the mailing list. Here is the way it works in practice - the Nabble archive right now 'sees' 80+ Mailing lists for TDF, once a person registers with the TDF/Nabble archive then from within the Nabble interface they can go to a TDF/List and have Nabble handle the list registration - you can, from within the Nabble interface opt to receive mails to your personal in-box, but the default it to not do so. If you registered to a TDF mail list in a 'normal' way, meaning outside of the Nabble interface, then you sill must register with the Nabble database (tdf specific db) before it will post a message to the any list for you - which is a good thing, so no anonymous posting. Let's look at that again - I registered with a TDF mail list, from my mail client, I go to Nabble and say post this to that list - it says I don't know you, so you register with Nabble and then go to the list and try to post - Nabble will say: You must be registered with the list and you just say - go to hell and post it..it works, because once nabble knows who you are it will do what you ask. Now you are not registered to a ML from you mail client. You go to Nabble, try to post, are prompted to register, you do so, now you want to post to a list and Nabble again tells you that you must _still_ register with the list (because Nabble does not own the lists) and you say OK - nabble will generate an email to register your email address (the one your registered with Nabble) to the mailing list with the noreply flag, you will get a confirmation in your mail client in-box and you must reply to that just as if you had registered yourself. Now - one advantage here is that you never need to unregister. This is really good for those cases where someone wants to ask 1 or 2 questions and then doesn't want to see the list anymore. or, a likely scenario, they ask 1 or 2 questions every year or so, this is a common scenario and again this never needing to unregister (therefore not needing to re-register) is handy. That 1 or 2 question person by the way (and yes I already ran the numbers for LIbO, just like I did at OO.o) makes up the overwhelming majority of list users (and not just on the users list). To wrap it up - for the OP here, just register with Nabble, for on-going purposes, I wrote this long email as a first draft for a wiki page...will put a link here when it is done. Thanks Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Use of Nabble and/or Mail to Thread Discussion ?
On 2/5/2011 2:00 AM, John M. Dlugosz wrote: I'm following these discussions and doing the documentation editing on my laptop, which is not my "main computer" where I have my email set up. I can't "Reply" using Nabble, since it says I don't have permission (why?). I can send out a top-level message to start a new thread by sending it to the list address, no problem. But how can I keep the discussion thread when I don't have the original message in an email program to "reply" to? Are you subscribed to the list, at least with -nomail? For some reason, this setup works differently than the OOo/ezmlm lists; I've seen some indications that people need the -nomail subscriptions here. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Problems Updating in Alfresco
Yes, please. Meanwhile, can we use the Discussion capability to indicate what's going on with documents we can't deal with properly, or is that also going to come up against a rule? I don't know exactly how Discussion works, but it could serve as a stopgap, I think. On 2/5/2011 1:17 AM, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) Maybe I should finish with the email-sending configuration quickly, or else we need to temporarily deactivate those rules. Let me get back to you quickly about that. David Nelson On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 14:31, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 06:04:13 + "John M. Dlugosz" wrote: I uploaded a new version, but got the same "error sending email". I can't tell if it actually took my new version or threw it away. Assuming it was taken, y'all can see that I added "comments" and a few edits with change tracking turned on. I see in the document properties you are listed as the modifier. But under versioning history Hal Parker's is the last name to update the file. Also, I didn't see any notes - on Alfresco's discussion or within the .odt. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Base documentation
On 2/5/2011 9:49 AM, Jean-Francois Nifenecker wrote: Hi Sophie! Le 05/02/2011 16:29, Sophie Gautier a écrit : May be you can work with Alex, he said on the FR list that he is going to improve the Base documentation once he has finished to translate the Guide for beginners? However I don't know in which language he will work :) Yes, I've read Alex' announcement but, as I'm not so sure we are working on the same things, didn't raise my hand (yet). I'm mainly focusing on writing a beginners' guide from scratch and, from what I had understood, Alex's translating an existing document (Mariano Casanova's mid level doc). Just correct me if I'm wrong. My beginners' guide idea was born from a few in-house requests that no-one could fulfill. As I already stated, I've already a few pages written on this and I'm working on a few more to come (see the outline in a former msg in this thread). Of course, sharing the free software ideas as you may know ;) I'm willing to cooperate into any collective work in this matter. All the best, I really like your outline, and I'd say your English is *more* than adequate to get the points across. I'd be glad to edit for smoothing it out if that's needed. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Template Use
On 2/4/2011 6:41 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 2/4/2011 4:27 PM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 15:42:27 -0600 Barbara Duprey wrote: Do I need to use an extension to make the Calc chapters apply the LibO template? Yes. TemplateChanger.oxt is its name. I've uploaded a copy to the various space. To add, go to Tools/Extension Manager/Add and find the downloaded .oxt file on your hard-drive. I think you need to restart. -- jdc Thanks, that did the trick. BTW, any idea why I get that error trying to Edit Offline? That part about email is confusing. I'm making the changes to Chapter 9, but I can't lock the file. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Template Use
On 2/4/2011 4:27 PM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Fri, 04 Feb 2011 15:42:27 -0600 Barbara Duprey wrote: Do I need to use an extension to make the Calc chapters apply the LibO template? Yes. TemplateChanger.oxt is its name. I've uploaded a copy to the various space. To add, go to Tools/Extension Manager/Add and find the downloaded .oxt file on your hard-drive. I think you need to restart. -- jdc Thanks, that did the trick. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Template Use
Do I need to use an extension to make the Calc chapters apply the LibO template? And I got the following message trying to Edit Offline for Chapter 9, no (Working Copy) was created, and the file was not locked, though the download succeeded: Please correct the errors below then click OK. Unable to check out Content Node due to system error:Transaction didn't commit: 0104 Failed to send email to:[documentationmailinglist] -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] What's Next?
Now that all the Writer Guide chapters are in Review, should I start picking up chapters from the Calc Guide for similar activity, or what? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Comments in documents
On 1/30/2011 10:04 PM, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) My 2 cents would be that comments inside documents are more immediately accessible to workers, and are more "portable" to wherever the document goes. But Alfresco's discussion capability is more appropriate if it's not just a conclusive comment but is likely to turn into a conversation. We're going to have to look into the question of setting-up an RSS feed from Alfresco (and maybe a status page akin to what you have with Pootle), so that work information is easily accessible outside the site or without logging in. I'll follow up on that this week. David Nelson Thanks, guys! Quite a few of the comments are about screenshots needing replacement (I'm on Win7 with no Linux access); some are about capability/feature problems where I couldn't successfully follow the procedures (I've submitted a couple of bugs, one more coming so far); others are more along the lines of "Is this worth changing?" (screenshots that incidentally use OOo, like the bibliography example that shows an OOo book, etc.). -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Fixing screwy chapter
On 1/30/2011 9:05 PM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 20:54:06 -0600 Barbara Duprey wrote: OK, my version is there now -- but it's only available through version history, the original version is still the one that appears directly in the folder. None of the actions seem to fit, since it isn't ready to be promoted. Will my version be the one the reviewer sees? Are we speaking of 0214WG3-WorkingWithFields.odt, located in Writer/working/Review? If so, I see the current version is 1.3, and has 'Correcting workflow error; edited offline, this is unreviewed copy' in the version notes. It that sounds like your doc, then you did it perfectly. -- jdc Hooray! That's it. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Fixing screwy chapter
On 1/30/2011 4:50 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 1/30/2011 3:36 PM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 15:22:05 -0600 Barbara Duprey wrote: Then, from the (Working Copy) in Review, Upload, then Check In, to get the edited I believe that would be check in, then use the find document dialog in that process to upload the new version. Re: version numbers, those are controlled by the machine - with very few opportunities for us to intervene. As with all technology, it can be done. I believe in this instance it would require one to be as comfortable juggling java objects as a clown in a Ringling Brothers/Barnum& Bailey extravaganza is juggling halibut. -- jdc OK, my version is there now -- but it's only available through version history, the original version is still the one that appears directly in the folder. None of the actions seem to fit, since it isn't ready to be promoted. Will my version be the one the reviewer sees? Love the analogy! OK, guess we'll just have to live with the messed-up version numbers. I'll do this when I can log in, right now it's just "Connected to..." forever. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Fixing screwy chapter
On 1/30/2011 3:36 PM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 15:22:05 -0600 Barbara Duprey wrote: Then, from the (Working Copy) in Review, Upload, then Check In, to get the edited I believe that would be check in, then use the find document dialog in that process to upload the new version. Re: version numbers, those are controlled by the machine - with very few opportunities for us to intervene. As with all technology, it can be done. I believe in this instance it would require one to be as comfortable juggling java objects as a clown in a Ringling Brothers/Barnum& Bailey extravaganza is juggling halibut. -- jdc Love the analogy! OK, guess we'll just have to live with the messed-up version numbers. I'll do this when I can log in, right now it's just "Connected to..." forever. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Comments in documents
As I've worked on chapters, I've used a number of comments. The first is essentially my own checklist of things to do/done, which is also info for the reviewer to see if the right bases have been covered, but there are others relating to the need to replace figures, or questioning the best way to handle something. Would the comments be better handled in an Alfresco "Discussion" associated with the Review copy, rather than in the document? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Fixing screwy chapter
In my earlier attempts to get Chapter 14 into Drafts, I apparently ended up with the original rather than my changed version there. As I read BootCamp, I should go to the Review folder, bring up Details for that chapter, and use Check Out (I have the edited copy on my own computer and don't want to download). Then, from the (Working Copy) in Review, Upload, then Check In, to get the edited version into Review as the active version for reviewers. Will I be able to fix the version number while I'm at it? Anyway, is this the correct process? I can do something similar to edit the first couple of chapters for consistency with the later process, but maybe I should just leave them alone so somebody else can deal with them as desired. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Another cyclone coming
On 1/30/2011 5:40 AM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: Today's cyclone (Anthony) is just far enough south to have missed bringing us wind and rain, but the next one is likely to be a different story. TC Yasi is due here around Thursday, and it's BIG. --Jean We'll cross our fingers for you and everybody there. Good luck! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Writer Guide status / my role
On 1/29/2011 10:26 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: What I've found is that the only step that takes significant amounts of time is checking the figures -- I get through all the other stuff in less than half an hour, and the majority of that is changing the> signs to arrows in OOoComputerCode. So the changing of the tables, using context menu and menu bar, and so on is basically in the noise. We have approximately 60 chapters to do. If 15 minutes are spent per chapter doing nonessential rebranding things, that's *15 hours* of time that could have been better spent on something more productive. I think we have to consider online users and not just printed copy users; the This sentence has been truncated. I'm wondering what you intended to say. Hal Yes, sorry -- hit send too soon! What I meant was that the colors are very noticeable in the PDFs and anything else other than grayscale-printed copies. Even with the grayscale, the difference between white and not-white shows up. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Writer Guide status / our role
On 1/29/2011 2:51 AM, Hal Parker wrote: I'm working on Chapter 4, Formatting Pages. I thought I'd be done by now, but I've found what I think is a feature that's not in OOo: Format> Title Page, and I want to write it up. Hal You're right, the whole Title Page thing is new. There seem to be some things missing, too -- I've submitted a couple of bugs, which turned up when I was trying to verify figures. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Writer Guide status / my role
On 1/29/2011 2:43 AM, David Nelson wrote: Hi Hal, :-) On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 11:38, Hal Parker wrote: The one thing I am definitely NOT doing is changing the borders and the row colours in tables of data. Now that the OOo books have their tables in black, white, and gray, I can't see the need for taking the time to change them to a slightly different pattern of black, white, and gray. IMHO, you're absolutely right. Surely it's not an important branding issue. I don't think we have to get pedantic about things, especially when it involves a lot of work of secondary priority. This coming week, I'll start helping you out, and will post at that time to liaise with you about where I should jump in. David Nelson What I've found is that the only step that takes significant amounts of time is checking the figures -- I get through all the other stuff in less than half an hour, and the majority of that is changing the > signs to arrows in OOoComputerCode. So the changing of the tables, using context menu and menu bar, and so on is basically in the noise. I think we have to consider online users and not just printed copy users; the -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] LibO Alfresco Bootcamp doc
On 1/27/2011 5:12 PM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 08:08:29 +1000 Hal Parker wrote: Jeremy, your bootcamp doc is extremely helpful. I haven't worked my way through all of it yet, but I did have one comment/question. Under "Review a Document", you said: "Submitting to Review and then Reviewing the same document is generally considered poor form and is not something LibreOffice condones..." If I have just submitted a chapter for review, but then realise that I failed to make some changes that I am aware of. I would normally check out the chapter, fix those errors, and then check it in again, leaving it in the Review space. Is that appropriate? Perhaps that's not considered "reviewing" since I don't pass it on to Proofing or return it to Drafts? Hal Absolutely. My aim with that passage was to curtail pushing a doc through the steps with only one set of eyes on it. I'll start a conversation on it in Alfresco to reflect that the passage should be rewritten to include check out the chapter, fix those errors, and then check it in again, leaving it in the Review space. And thank you for pointing that out. That is just one of many things that I think need extra input. -- jdc Thanks! That tells me how I can deal with the mixed-up chapter that ended up as the original instead of my markup, and the chapters I did before we settled on things like context menu and menu bar. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Base documentation
On 1/26/2011 3:43 PM, Hal Parker wrote: I've started a new thread for this, in response to Alex Thurgood's comments on Base docs. My opinion FWIW is that Base related stuff is desperately needed, including a full Base Guide. We've been rebranding the OOo user guides as an initial set for LibreOffice, but the Base Guide has never been written. Three draft chapters (badly in need of editing) exist, but that's all. One could build on that, and the Base Gyude outline, or start from scratch. Of course, other Base-related materials would be useful, too. IMO the "Getting Started with Base" chapter is quite good, so we wouldn't want to duplicate that. I personally don't have much database experience beyond the trivial, but I'm good at testing, critiquing, and editing, revising... if only we can find some database people to write an initial draft! I appreciate that developing the Base portion of the website should probably take priority over the much longer, more ambitious work needed on a Base Guide. Hal I haven't looked for any Base tutorials, but if any exist that would be useful info. And there are certainly lots of other tutorials, it would be good to start some exploration about rebranding those, too. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Alfresco Workflow Documentation
On 1/25/2011 4:57 PM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: All; Here is a link to the rough draft of a guide for LibreOffice's Alfresco workflow. You might have to be logged in to Alfresco to follow it. https://documentation.traduction.biz/alfresco/d/a/workspace/SpacesStore/8118043c-c936-4d29-92a9-b0695f73fa99/0100ABC-LOAlfrescoBootCamp.odt -- jdc Thanks, Jeremy! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Managing Alfresco Files
On 1/24/2011 8:11 PM, Rogerio Luz Coelho wrote: 2011/1/24 Barbara Duprey On 1/24/2011 10:51 AM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 16:51:02 +0100 Sigrid Carrera wrote: Hi Karl-Heinz, 2011/1/24 Karl-Heinz Gödderz Hi @all, Barbara Duprey schrieb: There's some documentation of the intended workflow happening, right? would someone be so kind and send a link where to find this? This documentation does not exist yet. Someone (Jeremy?) is writing this document right now. Sigrid Working now! If not today, then by tomorrow the first draft should be ready for review. :D -- jdc Boy, do I ever need this! I finished updating Chapter 14, went into the Review content, and chose Add Content. The upload appeared to succeed, but the chapter did not appear in the folder (after a Reload). I went back to the Working level and saw two versions under Drafts, one saying {working copy). What I think happened next is I selected the (working copy) and said Done editing. The Drafts list then didn't show that copy any more, so I selected the active copy on the Drafts list and selected Submit for review. Now the original version of the chapter is apparently what is in the Review folder, and I can't seem to get my version in there at all. I can't upload because of the duplicate name, and I don't dare "delete all previous versions"! Take it easy Barb ... we are all learning this stuff ... we'll get the hang of it ... ;) Rogerio I'm not stressing about it, just somewhat embarrassed! Now I'm hesitant to check out another chapter, because I'm not sure when I got off track before. Ah, well -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Managing Alfresco Files
On 1/24/2011 10:51 AM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 16:51:02 +0100 Sigrid Carrera wrote: Hi Karl-Heinz, 2011/1/24 Karl-Heinz Gödderz Hi @all, Barbara Duprey schrieb: There's some documentation of the intended workflow happening, right? would someone be so kind and send a link where to find this? This documentation does not exist yet. Someone (Jeremy?) is writing this document right now. Sigrid Working now! If not today, then by tomorrow the first draft should be ready for review. :D -- jdc Boy, do I ever need this! I finished updating Chapter 14, went into the Review content, and chose Add Content. The upload appeared to succeed, but the chapter did not appear in the folder (after a Reload). I went back to the Working level and saw two versions under Drafts, one saying {working copy). What I think happened next is I selected the (working copy) and said Done editing. The Drafts list then didn't show that copy any more, so I selected the active copy on the Drafts list and selected Submit for review. Now the original version of the chapter is apparently what is in the Review folder, and I can't seem to get my version in there at all. I can't upload because of the duplicate name, and I don't dare "delete all previous versions"! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Managing Alfresco Files
On 1/24/2011 6:49 AM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 21:15:15 -0600 Barbara Duprey wrote: I'm really embarrassed about this, but ... I went into Add Content while on the Writer-Working display, and uploaded Chapter 13. It apparently went somewhere, but I have no idea where! It belongs under Review with the other edited files, but I was never asked where to put it and I can't find it. What did I do wrong? I see it! It was added to Writer-Working. It is in the content items of that space, never being placed in the workflow sub-spaces. My thoughts are it needs to be deleted? -- jdc Yes, it's in the Review content now. where it belongs, so that copy is extra and should be deleted. There's some documentation of the intended workflow happening, right? I promise I'll read it and avoid creating similar problems in the future! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Managing Alfresco Files
On 1/23/2011 9:15 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: I'm really embarrassed about this, but ... I went into Add Content while on the Writer-Working display, and uploaded Chapter 13. It apparently went somewhere, but I have no idea where! It belongs under Review with the other edited files, but I was never asked where to put it and I can't find it. What did I do wrong? OK, I went to the Review content display and tried from there, apparently successfully -- still don't know where the first upload went, but the file now appears in the Review content. So I clicked on the next file I wanted to work on, Chapter 14. There was an action bar at the right with the first two being Edit Offline and Check Out. Since I wanted to check it out to edit offline, I selected the first action and the file downloaded. But now there appears to be no way to get back to the toolbar that includes the Check Out action. Sigh. Sorry to be causing trouble here, but if you'll bear with me for a while, I'm sure I'm trainable! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Managing Alfresco Files
I'm really embarrassed about this, but ... I went into Add Content while on the Writer-Working display, and uploaded Chapter 13. It apparently went somewhere, but I have no idea where! It belongs under Review with the other edited files, but I was never asked where to put it and I can't find it. What did I do wrong? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Alfresco Alfresco Alfresco
On 1/22/2011 11:47 AM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: All, The Alfresco site has now been tidied up. The easiest way to navigate is choosing `Company Home/LibreOffice Documentation/catalog`. There you will find 7 directories for each of our books. Within each of those directories you will find 3 sub-directories - past, planned and working. Samphan's workflow has been replicated to the 'working' sub-directories of each of our books. All of the chapters which were not checked out from the wiki have been uploaded to their respective directory on alfresco. I've also added a directory named 'various' which holds various files (Ms. Duprey's 'Terminology and Styles' now resides there, for instance). Thanks, glad you found a home for it. Needs some updating from recent e-mail discussions, though. I'm also wondering if the reworked template ("LO" for "OOo") might include the additional character styles I indicated could be helpful -- has anybody else looked at that? Too bad the style names will have the capital-O capital-whatever combination, though, I think "Lib" would have been more readable. Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, that was a big effort, I'm sure, and will be much appreciated. @Ron, You have chapter 14 and Appendix A of the Getting Started Guide checked out in the wiki. When you are done editing can you please upload to alfresco? @Barbara, You have chapter 13 of the Writer Guide checked out of the wiki. When you are done editing can you please upload to alfresco? Sure. Thanks for doing the sync to the current status! @David, Do I have permission to massively rewrite http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Development to erase our matrices and point to the alfresco site? @All, Constructive criticism heartily welcomed. Documentation to aid in getting one's feet wet with alfresco is forthcoming. Does this include some content for the very intriguing (but empty) Workflow stuff? All I could locate currently is the .png file taken from the wiki (or its source), and a toolbar-ish thing with various actions that can be taken. -- jdc -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Box/Field
On 1/21/2011 4:41 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: I don't think this one can really be determined easily by grep, but I've found some things that indicate user entry in the xxx box, and others that use xxx field. I think the second is preferable, right? "Field" is a term that is also used for a specific type of thing (a variable or reference to data), which is not a box to type in. Therefore I think it's better to reserve the term "field" for the specific instance and use "box" for user entry. OK, thanks. By the way, I've now done Chapters 9 - 12 of the Writer Guide, and I'm working on Chapter 13. Is the plan to wait until they're all done before the proofreading begins? And is anything happening about setting up the Calc Guide? And with three structures going (the wiki, Alfresco, and ODFauthors), we'll need to be careful about where the "real" work is being done! Where are you putting the docs you're working on? Are they in Alfresco as well as on the wiki? I've been away for awhile and have not caught up with what's going on or where the latest files are. I'm using the control table on the wiki, downloading from there, working on the chapters, then uploading them again and updating the control table. I really haven't gone into Alfresco much, I haven't been duplicating them there because I have a pretty much knee-jerk dislike of having multiple copies of the "same" thing -- I saw that cause too much havoc during my working career! Is anyone actually using ODFAuthors for LibreOffice docs? Sounds like Andreas might be, but is anyone else? Hal Not that I know of, yet. As I understand it, we'll be moving over strictly to Alfresco at some point, but for now we're just playing there and using the wiki for the official work. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Box/Field
I don't think this one can really be determined easily by grep, but I've found some things that indicate user entry in the xxx box, and others that use xxx field. I think the second is preferable, right? By the way, I've now done Chapters 9 - 12 of the Writer Guide, and I'm working on Chapter 13. Is the plan to wait until they're all done before the proofreading begins? And is anything happening about setting up the Calc Guide? And with three structures going (the wiki, Alfresco, and ODFauthors), we'll need to be careful about where the "real" work is being done! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Another grep - Drop-down
Given the very small numbers of any of these phrases, my guess is that the whole idea of naming the control type is mostly being avoided. My personal choice would be to say something like "select xxx from the yyy list," where yyy is the name of the option. I agree it's not worth changing existing uses of "drop-down list" or "selection list" when they're there, though. On 1/17/2011 5:41 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Ok, i have spotted the numbers drop-down list = 6 or 7 selection list= 14 I still think we should aim to use "Drop-down list" because it makes more intuitive sense to people that have not heard either term before. However, i still think there is no need to change whichever of those 2 is used in each place. Someone said there is a glossary or is that not quite built yet? Could i help build it? Is there an easy link to it, if it exists? Regards from Tom :) From: Sophie Gautier To: documentation@libreoffice.org Sent: Mon, 17 January, 2011 11:08:45 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Another grep - Drop-down Hi Barbara, On 16/01/2011 22:31, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 1/16/2011 12:05 PM, Sophie Gautier wrote: Hi Barbara, On 16/01/2011 20:37, Barbara Duprey wrote: OK, which is used in the help -- drop-down, drop-down list, drop-down menu, ? - drop-down alone is not used - drop-down menu is used twice - drop-down icon is used once - drop-down list(s) is used several times. Kind regards Sophie Thanks, Sophie! Hmm -- is there another term used instead? "Several" doesn't seem like enough to cover this, as often as such things are used. Yes, I was also surprised by the "not so many" occurrences of the term (may 6 or 7). "Selection list" or "selection menu" maybe? Or "combo box" as it's called in the form control toolbar? A quick check showed that at least sometimes, there is no term used at all, just directions to "select the ..." without mentioning the control type. So maybe that should be preferred? - selection list is appearing 14 times - selection menu is not used - combo box is really dedicated to Form or Basic use. Kind regards Sophie -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] unsubscribe
On 1/17/2011 2:46 AM, Kurt Stahl wrote: can you explain to me, why I got 85 mails today from your organisation? It is incredible! Apparently, when you subscribed to the various lists you were unprepared for the volume of message traffic you would receive, and that's unfortunate. But to stop receiving the e-mails, you will have to retrace the same path you used in subscribing, this time using the word unsubscribe instead of the word subscribe. That is, you will need to unsubscribe any list you are currently receiving. The general format is listname+unsubscr...@libreoffice.org, where listname is, for example, documentation. This will need to be done from the same address used when you subscribed. If you still have the original subscription requests in your Sent folder (or the equivalent), that would be a good place to start. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Another grep - Drop-down
On 1/16/2011 12:05 PM, Sophie Gautier wrote: Hi Barbara, On 16/01/2011 20:37, Barbara Duprey wrote: OK, which is used in the help -- drop-down, drop-down list, drop-down menu, ? - drop-down alone is not used - drop-down menu is used twice - drop-down icon is used once - drop-down list(s) is used several times. Kind regards Sophie Thanks, Sophie! Hmm -- is there another term used instead? "Several" doesn't seem like enough to cover this, as often as such things are used. "Selection list" or "selection menu" maybe? Or "combo box" as it's called in the form control toolbar? A quick check showed that at least sometimes, there is no term used at all, just directions to "select the ..." without mentioning the control type. So maybe that should be preferred? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Another grep - Drop-down
OK, which is used in the help -- drop-down, drop-down list, drop-down menu, ? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Dialog/Dialog Box
I started making this change (in Chapter) but backed it out -- right now it's apparently consistently used and appears in index entries, so having a mix across the document would be apparent and confusing. Agree? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Terminology and Styles
On 1/15/2011 1:39 PM, Jeremy Cartwright wrote: On Sat, 15 Jan 2011 13:22:57 -0600 Barbara Duprey wrote: I'd be glad to -- but I must be missing something very basic. When I logged in and looked around, I saw no project-specific things at all -- just what came preinstalled by Alfresco. "My" space was empty, and the Navigation tree didn't show anything that looked like ours. The current LO workspace is available by clicking on 'Company Home' and then 'LibreOffice Documentation'. Are those choices available to you? -- jdc Yes, I'm OK now, thanks. I had interpreted "Company" as Alfresco rather than LibreOffice! I didn't look around too long, and I apologize for not having followed all the Alfrresco threads, I'm sure this was already covered. I put the document into the Drafts folder, hope that's the right one. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Terminology and Styles
On 1/15/2011 12:41 PM, David Nelson wrote: Hi Barbara, :-) On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 01:44, Barbara Duprey wrote: I put together a document that I hope can be useful -- maybe somebody can tell me where it should go (if anywhere) and how to get it there for collaboration. Right now, it's a document based on the chapter template. Can I invite you to log into your account on the Alfresco site and put it there right now? We can use this as a way to get you up and running collaborating on Alfresco, if you're willing? Then we can review and refine it as a task between several team members...? David Nelson I'd be glad to -- but I must be missing something very basic. When I logged in and looked around, I saw no project-specific things at all -- just what came preinstalled by Alfresco. "My" space was empty, and the Navigation tree didn't show anything that looked like ours. BTW, this list (and presumably the others) strips attachments. The OOo lists always seem to allow ODF filetypes to be posted; is there any chance of a policy change here? (Probably belongs on the website list, but I'm not subscribed there, at least, not yet.) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Terminology and Styles
I put together a document that I hope can be useful -- maybe somebody can tell me where it should go (if anywhere) and how to get it there for collaboration. Right now, it's a document based on the chapter template. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] pop-up is generic
On 1/13/2011 10:20 AM, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 00:08, Barbara Duprey wrote: I'd definitely be glad to capture it somewhere. It seems like an extension of the "to-do" list that's on the wiki -- is that on Alfresco, too? (I haven't gotten into Alfresco at all yet, sorry -- I've been working from the wiki.) It's becoming well worth getting into it... we're about 60% of the way to a workflow, and the rest should be implemented quickly... it will be much more organized and simple to manage on Alfresco... ;-) Would you feel like giving it another trial...? David Nelson "Another"? Hadn't even started yet -- but OK, sure. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] xkcd: Good Code
On 1/12/2011 7:31 PM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: This applies to documentation as well. Cheers, Jean http://xkcd.com/844/ Love it! Thanks for the pointer, looks like a fun site. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] pop-up is generic
I'd definitely be glad to capture it somewhere. It seems like an extension of the "to-do" list that's on the wiki -- is that on Alfresco, too? (I haven't gotten into Alfresco at all yet, sorry -- I've been working from the wiki.) On 1/12/2011 8:38 PM, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) It would be interesting to see how Sophie's offered content could be incorporated into the Alfresco site, to make it a reference resource available to docs workers. Would you have time for and feel like investigating that, by any chance, Barbara? David Nelson On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 04:35, Barbara Duprey wrote: I think the intent is for the documentation (embedded help, online, PDFs, published) to be as platform-neutral as possible, and as consistent with each other as possible in the terminology used. Sophie is kindly doing greps on the embedded help so we can try to do that. Always interesting to get the backstory, though! I don't even remember now what terms were used in the IBM product I was working on embedded help for (back in 1996, in one of my last actual paid activities). -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] pop-up is generic
On 1/12/2011 1:22 PM, Gary Schnabl wrote: On 1/12/2011 1:14 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: OK, it seems that "context menu" is the preferred choice. Thanks! Sometime around twenty years ago, Microsoft and Apple employed differing forms--context versus contextual--in their documentation. I forgot which one used which. Other developers typically chose the form of the two forms based upon the O/S their apps used. IOW, back then it was a PC/Mac sort of thing. Doing some pro bono (they gave me expensive embedded-microcontroller firmware-development apps to use for free) technical-editing work for Motorola in the very late 1990s/early 2000s, I used each form, depending upon which O/S the particular IDE apps used. So, another consideration is to employ the term based upon the particular O/S hosting the office suite. Gary I think the intent is for the documentation (embedded help, online, PDFs, published) to be as platform-neutral as possible, and as consistent with each other as possible in the terminology used. Sophie is kindly doing greps on the embedded help so we can try to do that. Always interesting to get the backstory, though! I don't even remember now what terms were used in the IBM product I was working on embedded help for (back in 1996, in one of my last actual paid activities). -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] pop-up is generic
On 1/12/2011 4:32 AM, Sophie Gautier wrote: Hi Barbara, On 12/01/2011 01:42, Barbara Duprey wrote: [...] OK, thanks. Sounds as if we should change that as we go. And we also seem agreed on "dialog" rather than "dialog box" -- right? That is what is used in the help files. - For contextual menu/context menu: Contextual menu doesn't exist in the help file. Context menu is the one that is used. Interesting -- the translation material seems to go the other way. If you speak about French translation in the glossary, I usually work with Gnome, Mozilla, Debian and KDE groups, so there is sometime an harmonization between their usage and mine. Gnome/KDE and OOo have put a shared glossary on line grouping all the words we use for the French products. I was talking about the file you pointed to, and what I saw in the Calc version. The term "context menu" is not there, but "contextual menu" is. (Only looked at the English column.) How about "context menu" vs "pop-up menu" or "pop-up window menu" or "pop-up window" or the other variants on that, with and without the hyphen? pop-up menu: used twice helpcontent2-fr/smath/01.po:"choices from this pop-up menu to access the helpcontent2-fr/shared/04.po:msgid "Opens the list of the control field currently selected in a dialog. These shortcut keys apply not only to combo boxes but also to icon buttons with pop-up menus. Close an opened list by pressing the Escape key." pop-up window menu: not used pop-up window: not used the variant of the three without the hyphen is not used. Kind regards Sophie OK, it seems that "context menu" is the preferred choice. Thanks! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] pop-up is generic
On 1/11/2011 11:29 AM, Sophie Gautier wrote: On 11/01/2011 19:41, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 1/10/2011 11:48 PM, Sophie Gautier wrote: Hi Jean, Barbara, On 11/01/2011 06:31, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 1/10/2011 8:22 PM, Jean Weber wrote: Seriously, shouldn't you get the glossary from Sophie and start with that? It will probably contain most of the terms that the team needs, without lengthy debate. Jean I agree. What I was thinking about is a compilation not just of the terms, but also of what paragraph style (fairly obvious as a rule) and especially what character style (sometimes not so obvious) to use for each of the kinds of things we talk about in the guides. That probably exists someplace, too, right? I definitely saw some things that were inconsistent and/or clearly wrong, like OOoMenuPath being used instead of OOoStrongEmphasis, or dialog names using different character styles in different places. But that kind of correction is very time-consuming, and probably beyond the scope of this effort right now. It would help for later reference, though. So we were using an online tool called SunGloss to maintain this glossaries for several languages. It was a great tool, but Oracle has decided to shut it down and use OpenCTI instead wich is a translation tool, so it's not the same usage unfortunately. I'm still thinking of a tool to maintain our glossaries, but their is currently more important tasks for me. Here you'll find the last export I've made from SunGloss for the French language: http://fr.openoffice.org/files/documents/67/4226/export_20080417_en-US_fr-FR.zip This file contains all the words used in the UI with the French translation and comments about this translation and also the state of the word (approved or pending). So there is too much information but at least you get the list of word. Also it's from 2008, so some new words are missing, I can provide you with a list of them later (I maintain another glossary now). To open the file, you should change the extension to .csv and open it as a tab separated value file with Calc, then you'll be able to filter the file easily. Thanks, Sophie. Definitely a huge number of items (15,887) there! It doesn't look as if it will resolve the "which to use" issue, though. Apparently it includes anything that has been used, so both "dialog" and "dialog box" are there, as are "menu bar" and "main menu" (for example). "Context menu" isn't there, though "contextual menu" is -- so that seems to have been a global change. And there are a slew of "pop-up" related terms! So absence of a term is meaningful, but presence really isn't. Yes, it doesn't help you yet, you need to update it as time being and really adapt it to your needs. But I can help here by searching (greping) for the occurrences of the words in the help files quiet quickly. Would you be able to send me a list of terms you need to check for consistency? I'll search for them and will send them back to you. If you don't have a list, but just terms from time to time, no problem, I'll be able to check for the any way. Right now, there's no list. Thanks for the offer to grep the terms, that should be a real help. - So for menu bar/main menu: Main menu is appearing only once in the help "Note for Mac OS X users: The Help mentions the menu path Tools - Options at numerous places. Replace this path with %PRODUCTNAME - Preferences on your Mac OS X main menu" This is menu bar that is used instead. OK, thanks. Sounds as if we should change that as we go. And we also seem agreed on "dialog" rather than "dialog box" -- right? - For contextual menu/context menu: Contextual menu doesn't exist in the help file. Context menu is the one that is used. Interesting -- the translation material seems to go the other way. How about "context menu" vs "pop-up menu" or "pop-up window menu" or "pop-up window" or the other variants on that, with and without the hyphen? This grep is done on OOoDEV_m84 help files. Kind regards Sophie -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Maximizing Value for Time Spent
Which would be better right now -- concentrating on the basically mechanical rebranding activities for a chapter, or working on both those and the content? Obviously the second takes longer for turnaround but (at least in theory) makes the chapter better in addition to rebranding. I took the first approach on Chapter 9, but would it be better to just get all of the chapters rebranded for now and come back for content later? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] pop-up is generic
On 1/10/2011 11:48 PM, Sophie Gautier wrote: Hi Jean, Barbara, On 11/01/2011 06:31, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 1/10/2011 8:22 PM, Jean Weber wrote: Seriously, shouldn't you get the glossary from Sophie and start with that? It will probably contain most of the terms that the team needs, without lengthy debate. Jean I agree. What I was thinking about is a compilation not just of the terms, but also of what paragraph style (fairly obvious as a rule) and especially what character style (sometimes not so obvious) to use for each of the kinds of things we talk about in the guides. That probably exists someplace, too, right? I definitely saw some things that were inconsistent and/or clearly wrong, like OOoMenuPath being used instead of OOoStrongEmphasis, or dialog names using different character styles in different places. But that kind of correction is very time-consuming, and probably beyond the scope of this effort right now. It would help for later reference, though. So we were using an online tool called SunGloss to maintain this glossaries for several languages. It was a great tool, but Oracle has decided to shut it down and use OpenCTI instead wich is a translation tool, so it's not the same usage unfortunately. I'm still thinking of a tool to maintain our glossaries, but their is currently more important tasks for me. Here you'll find the last export I've made from SunGloss for the French language: http://fr.openoffice.org/files/documents/67/4226/export_20080417_en-US_fr-FR.zip This file contains all the words used in the UI with the French translation and comments about this translation and also the state of the word (approved or pending). So there is too much information but at least you get the list of word. Also it's from 2008, so some new words are missing, I can provide you with a list of them later (I maintain another glossary now). To open the file, you should change the extension to .csv and open it as a tab separated value file with Calc, then you'll be able to filter the file easily. Thanks, Sophie. Definitely a huge number of items (15,887) there! It doesn't look as if it will resolve the "which to use" issue, though. Apparently it includes anything that has been used, so both "dialog" and "dialog box" are there, as are "menu bar" and "main menu" (for example). "Context menu" isn't there, though "contextual menu" is -- so that seems to have been a global change. And there are a slew of "pop-up" related terms! So absence of a term is meaningful, but presence really isn't. Hope this help to begin, but I think the more useful really would be to have an online tool accessible to each author to add words and comments, even for style, where there is the ability to make some export for offline work. Right. PS -- Sure glad the floods didn't get you! yes, sure :) Kind regards Sohie -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] pop-up is generic
On 1/10/2011 9:54 PM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 21:31 -0600, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 1/10/2011 8:22 PM, Jean Weber wrote: Seriously, shouldn't you get the glossary from Sophie and start with that? It will probably contain most of the terms that the team needs, without lengthy debate. Jean I agree. What I was thinking about is a compilation not just of the terms, but also of what paragraph style (fairly obvious as a rule) and especially what character style (sometimes not so obvious) to use for each of the kinds of things we talk about in the guides. That probably exists someplace, too, right? Look in the template. They should be described there, although I don't think it contains a definitive list, and a summary from the POV of "For item x, use style XX" to supplement "Use style XX for items X, Y, Z" info in the template would be very useful. (That's been on my to-do list for OOo for years.) Ah! Never thought to look there -- the template in its older form had already been applied, just reapplied it to pick up changes. Good stuff! Maybe when we're done with the rebranding I can take some time for the reversed POV summary. I expect there might also be some additional character styles that would help by being obviously intended when referring to parts of the UI, for example. I definitely saw some things that were inconsistent and/or clearly wrong, Yes, especially in some of the chapters (like #9) that haven't been properly worked on for several iterations. And no one at OOo has ever had the leisure to do a thorough consistency fix-up. I went after it pretty thoroughly for content just now, but gave up on the consistency aspect due to the time involved. This is the kind of thing I'm perfectly willing to do, though. like OOoMenuPath being used instead of OOoStrongEmphasis, or dialog names using different character styles in different places. But that kind of correction is very time-consuming, and probably beyond the scope of this effort right now. It would help for later reference, though. PS -- Sure glad the floods didn't get you! We are fortunate this time, but our turn could still come, if/when a cyclone comes through the north in the next 2-3 months. --Jean -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Hyperlinks
On 1/11/2011 3:40 AM, Hal Parker wrote: On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 1/10/2011 6:34 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: Is some part of the process going to make active hyperlinks to other chapters, and into a glossary? (I noticed an apparent link for "heading" in Chapter 9 of the Writer Guide, for example). Or should we be doing that somehow? Not at this time. Having those work for the user depends on conditions we can't control, like whether they are connected to the Internet. Also they are messy to set up until all the files are in place and relatively stable. Even doing them on a wiki is much too fiddly and time-consuming IMO. All of this could change later, of course. If there is an apparent link in a file, it's not intentional and should not be there. Hal My "apparent links" turned out to be index entries! Figured it out after looking at the to-do list for the rebranding, I haven't worked with these before. Not quite sure why some of them have selected text and others just an indicator that an entry exists, was happy to see the forward/back from the editing dialog. If the selected text becomes the index entry, the text retains a gray background. If text is selected but then changed in some way for use in the index entry (for example, to change an upper case letter to lower case), then the index entry is marked by a small indicator. One can also add index entries without selecting anything first; in this case, again the entry is marked by a small indicator. Hal Thanks for the explanation, Hal! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] pop-up is generic
On 1/10/2011 8:22 PM, Jean Weber wrote: Seriously, shouldn't you get the glossary from Sophie and start with that? It will probably contain most of the terms that the team needs, without lengthy debate. Jean I agree. What I was thinking about is a compilation not just of the terms, but also of what paragraph style (fairly obvious as a rule) and especially what character style (sometimes not so obvious) to use for each of the kinds of things we talk about in the guides. That probably exists someplace, too, right? I definitely saw some things that were inconsistent and/or clearly wrong, like OOoMenuPath being used instead of OOoStrongEmphasis, or dialog names using different character styles in different places. But that kind of correction is very time-consuming, and probably beyond the scope of this effort right now. It would help for later reference, though. PS -- Sure glad the floods didn't get you! On Tuesday, January 11, 2011, David Nelson wrote: Hi, :-) The term I have always used in my own work is "context-sensitive menu". Similarly, I prefer "dialog box" rather than just "dialog" But Hal mentioned an idea that we could compile a terminology glossary for the team, so that we all stay on the same track terminology-wise... Interested in "getting involved", Tom? ;-) David Nelson -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Hyperlinks
On 1/10/2011 6:34 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: Is some part of the process going to make active hyperlinks to other chapters, and into a glossary? (I noticed an apparent link for "heading" in Chapter 9 of the Writer Guide, for example). Or should we be doing that somehow? Not at this time. Having those work for the user depends on conditions we can't control, like whether they are connected to the Internet. Also they are messy to set up until all the files are in place and relatively stable. Even doing them on a wiki is much too fiddly and time-consuming IMO. All of this could change later, of course. If there is an apparent link in a file, it's not intentional and should not be there. Hal My "apparent links" turned out to be index entries! Figured it out after looking at the to-do list for the rebranding, I haven't worked with these before. Not quite sure why some of them have selected text and others just an indicator that an entry exists, was happy to see the forward/back from the editing dialog. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Writer Guide Chapter 9 Edited
I've returned this chapter after editing, hope this is what you're looking for. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Hyperlinks
Is some part of the process going to make active hyperlinks to other chapters, and into a glossary? (I noticed an apparent link for "heading" in Chapter 9 of the Writer Guide, for example). Or should we be doing that somehow? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Dialog or dialog box?
On 1/9/2011 8:57 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 1/9/2011 8:22 PM, Ron Faile wrote: On 1/9/2011 7:43 PM, Hal Parker wrote: Are we using the term "dialog" or "dialog box"? The OOo books vary in usage: Getting Started and Calc (and maybe Draw; I didn't check) use "dialog" while the Writer Guide uses "dialog box". The LibreOffice options use the term "dialog" for some of the options. I haven't checked the help, but I think it also uses "dialog". If we settle on "dialog", I will amend the Writer Guide chapters as I go through them doing other things. FWIW, I personally prefer "dialog" but the important thing is to be consistent, when we can. I suspect other variations in terminology in both the program and the user guides, left over from OOo. Hal The authors at OOo are in the process of changing their docs from dialog box to dialog. I agree with you and think we should go with dialog. It sound better to me. The online help uses dialog as well. That would be a good list to have of some typical conventions. Maybe we can find a place on the wiki and list them. Ron Another term is "main menu" vs "menu bar" -- both were used in the chapter I'm working on. And then there's "tab" vs "page" for the tabbed dialogs. It would also be good to have a list of the paragraph and character style usage. Character styles, in particular, were really inconsistent in what I saw. Dialogs, options, and so on really should be consistent in their tagging across the whole document. No time to work on that now, I'm sure, but Another term is context menu vs pop-up menu for what happens after a right-click. I could start collecting all this stuff for a style guide, if there isn't one already. Any interest? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Edited Writer Guide Chapter 1
On 1/9/2011 8:01 PM, Ron Faile wrote: On 1/9/2011 7:04 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: The only Liberation font that shows up in my font selection list is Liberation Sans Narrow, although all the text still has the Liberation Sans font. I should probably install both of these fonts, but where should I get them? The download link is here: https://fedorahosted.org/liberation-fonts/ filename: liberation-fonts-ttf-1.06.0.20100721.tar.gz <https://fedorahosted.org/releases/l/i/liberation-fonts/liberation-fonts-ttf-1.06.0.20100721.tar.gz> Got the fonts (eventually!). Thanks. The formatting for tables has changed. Borders horizontal only, below rows only, except above heading; heading row background gray 10%. No change to line color/width. Right? Right. Thanks for the clarification. Ron -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Dialog or dialog box?
On 1/9/2011 8:22 PM, Ron Faile wrote: On 1/9/2011 7:43 PM, Hal Parker wrote: Are we using the term "dialog" or "dialog box"? The OOo books vary in usage: Getting Started and Calc (and maybe Draw; I didn't check) use "dialog" while the Writer Guide uses "dialog box". The LibreOffice options use the term "dialog" for some of the options. I haven't checked the help, but I think it also uses "dialog". If we settle on "dialog", I will amend the Writer Guide chapters as I go through them doing other things. FWIW, I personally prefer "dialog" but the important thing is to be consistent, when we can. I suspect other variations in terminology in both the program and the user guides, left over from OOo. Hal The authors at OOo are in the process of changing their docs from dialog box to dialog. I agree with you and think we should go with dialog. It sound better to me. The online help uses dialog as well. That would be a good list to have of some typical conventions. Maybe we can find a place on the wiki and list them. Ron Another term is "main menu" vs "menu bar" -- both were used in the chapter I'm working on. And then there's "tab" vs "page" for the tabbed dialogs. It would also be good to have a list of the paragraph and character style usage. Character styles, in particular, were really inconsistent in what I saw. Dialogs, options, and so on really should be consistent in their tagging across the whole document. No time to work on that now, I'm sure, but -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Edited Writer Guide Chapter 1
On 1/9/2011 3:22 PM, Ron Faile wrote: On 1/9/2011 1:26 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: There was a change to the Tip/Note/Caution tables, too, as I noticed in looking at the Getting Started with Writer chapter and working on Chapter 9 of the Writer Guide. All have the line color changed to Gray 40%, and a background color in cell A1: Tip is Chart 6, Note is Green 4, Caution is Chart 3. I didn't notice any other such housekeeeping-type changes -- are there any? About the status in the control table Feedback column -- as I understand it that stays at NO while we have the chapter checked out and have not yet replaced the wiki file, goes to BACK if we replace the wiki file and no longer have it checked out, but know it is not done, and goes to YES when we think it's ready for proofreading. Is that right? If a chapter is checked out again for editing while in BACK status, does it go to NO again, or is the ID in the Checkout column enough? Yes, the > symbol changed to an arrow in menu paths. Once you do the find and replace, you'll need to select each arrow and change the character style to OOoComputer Code. This changes the font to Liberation Mono and makes the arrow centered. There was not a centered arrow in Liberation Sans. The only Liberation font that shows up in my font selection list is Liberation Sans Narrow, although all the text still has the Liberation Sans font. I should probably install both of these fonts, but where should I get them? The formatting for tables has changed. Borders horizontal only, below rows only, except above heading; heading row background gray 10%. No change to line color/width. Right? You'll need to check the links. Some go to the OOo site. For example the extensions link in Ch. 1 of the Writer Guide, the new link is in Ch. 1 of Getting Started. You're right in you're latest email, the chapter title references have changed slightly. One thing that I'm not sure of at the moment is the discussion that's going on about doing screenshots under windows. From what they are saying, the screenshots may have to be done under Linux. So for the moment, you might want to hold off on doing much work on those until there is a clearer answer on how to move forward. I don't want us to do a bunch of work that will have to be changed. Maybe someone else on the lists can help. The status for the Feedback column will stay No until the chapter is ready to move to the Proofing stage. Only if it gets to Proofing and someone sees something that needs to be changed does it need the Back status. When you check something out, you don't need to change the status of the Feedback, Proofing or Publish until you're done with that part of the work or have reviewed it and noticed that it either needed more work or agree that it is ready to be published. If it's checked out again for more editing after in Back status, you're ID is enough. You don't really need to change the status until you're ready for it to go to Proofing again. Ron Thanks for the clarification. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Edited Writer Guide Chapter 1
On 1/9/2011 3:07 PM, Hal Parker wrote: On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Hal Parker wrote: On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 5:26 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 1/9/2011 6:20 AM, Hal Parker wrote: I have just finished editing Writer Guide Chapter 1. I updated the template and replaced many of the screenshots, mostly using images from Ron's zip file or from the Getting Started guide. I put the replacement file on both the Alfresco site and the wiki. Hope I did the Alfresco thing correctly! There was a change to the Tip/Note/Caution tables, too, as I noticed in looking at the Getting Started with Writer chapter and working on Chapter 9 of the Writer Guide. All have the line color changed to Gray 40%, and a background color in cell A1: Tip is Chart 6, Note is Green 4, Caution is Chart 3. I didn't notice any other such housekeeeping-type changes -- are there any? Thanks for the reminder about the Tip/Note/Caution tables. I forgot them; too focused on the figures. I'll go back into the Writer Guide chapter and update those tables. I've checked out the file again in both Alfresco and the wiki. Given my memory, we'd best wait for Ron to remind us of any other changes which are not applied by the template. I just remembered another change. The OOo chapters use this style for referring to other chapters: "Chapter X (Title of chapter)" -- Ron has changed them to "Chapter X, Title of chapter" -- without the quotes, of course. Hal Thanks, Hal. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Edited Writer Guide Chapter 1
On 1/9/2011 6:20 AM, Hal Parker wrote: I have just finished editing Writer Guide Chapter 1. I updated the template and replaced many of the screenshots, mostly using images from Ron's zip file or from the Getting Started guide. I put the replacement file on both the Alfresco site and the wiki. Hope I did the Alfresco thing correctly! Hal There was a change to the Tip/Note/Caution tables, too, as I noticed in looking at the Getting Started with Writer chapter and working on Chapter 9 of the Writer Guide. All have the line color changed to Gray 40%, and a background color in cell A1: Tip is Chart 6, Note is Green 4, Caution is Chart 3. I didn't notice any other such housekeeeping-type changes -- are there any? About the status in the control table Feedback column -- as I understand it that stays at NO while we have the chapter checked out and have not yet replaced the wiki file, goes to BACK if we replace the wiki file and no longer have it checked out, but know it is not done, and goes to YES when we think it's ready for proofreading. Is that right? If a chapter is checked out again for editing while in BACK status, does it go to NO again, or is the ID in the Checkout column enough? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Contributing
On 1/6/2011 12:36 AM, Ron Faile wrote: On 1/5/2011 9:35 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: OK, I'd like to work on Chapter 9, Working with Tables. I see that I should put my wiki ID (Dupreyb) in the Checkout column. The existing file already is using the template, so would there still be a need for me to install that anywhere? Where am I supposed to work on the chapter? It would seem that there's a resources development page, but I don't know where or whether that is what is meant to be used as a workspace -- or maybe there's now or soon to be an Alfresco location where I can work in Writer. Yes. It is already using a version of the LibO template, just not the latest one. Installing the new template will just make sure that all the styles in each document you work on will be consistent and have the latest revisions. If you want to install it, just download the file, open it in LibO and click File, Templates, Save. Type the name of the template file (LibO3_3_chapter_template) in the name box and click ok. Whenever you open a file that uses an older version of that template, you'll be prompted to update it to the latest version. Just click yes when prompted and save the doc. We're doing the work on our PCs at the moment. Don't know if that will change or not with a CMS. You're workspace is actually the chapter itself. The change tracking feature helps others to see what you've done on it. For the moment, if you have comments about a specific part of the chapter, I would insert comments in the chapter itself unless there is something that you want to discuss on the mailing list. The Getting Started Guide files have a link to a development page for each chapter. This can be for anything you want others to know about what you've done or what needs to be done on the chapter. The dev pages for the Writer Guide haven't been created yet. Once the chapter .odt file is in the right place, I can turn on change tracking (and versioning?) and make the changes; I've gotten the Getting Started with Writer chapter for reference, and I'm assuming that any screenshots used there that are relevant in the Tables chapter are in the zip file. Might I need any others, and if so, how should I go about acquiring them? (Presumably using Paint on a print-screen image is not sufficient!) Is there some definitive list of the differences between the currently-described features and operation, and new ones LibO has, or is this a matter of trying the capabilities in LibO? Yes I'd use change tracking, but versioning is not needed. Right now none of the screenshots in chapter 9 are in the zip file. I've been creating them as I went along. There are some in there that can be used for ch. 1 and 2 of the Writer Guide as some of the material in the Getting Started Guide is repeated in those chapters. So for the ones you want to update, you'll have to create them. Keep in mind that you are free to just edit the text if that's all you want to do. I use Greenshot [1] and Gadwin PrintScreen [2] on Windows (don't know if there is a Linux version of those) to take the screenshots and GIMP [3] (there is a Linux version) to do editing if needed. You're right, lol, Paint would not be the best choice. :) As for keeping up with new features and changes, the developers have been creating a list of changes and post it weekly on the development mailing list [4]. Eventually, I'll also need to know how to put the file where it can be reviewed (if it doesn't just stay where it is, with the appropriate control table update to show it's ready). And if something is supposed to be done in the control table's Document Development column, and the associated file (which is apparently a kind of note holder for communication with the team), who sets that up, where, and how is it updated? Sorry if all this is really obvious -- but the first time is always the hardest, right? Yes it is. It took me a while to get the hang of it too, so learning is allowed :) Once you've made changes to a chapter and want to upload it to the wiki, go to the docs dev page [5], sign in to the wiki and click the upload file link on the left of the page. Click the Browse button and select the file you've been working on. I usually select Documentation and EN for categories and CC, LGPL and MPL for the license. Then click Upload file. You'll see it at the top of the revision list once the upload is complete. :) When you download a file and edit it, be sure to leave the filename as is. That way when it's uploaded again the file history can be tracked and reverted if necessary. Other pages link to the filenames as well so it prevents having to update the links every time a new version is uploaded. hth, Ron [1] http://sourceforge.net/projects/greenshot/ [2] http://www.gadwin.com/printscreen/ (version 4.5 is
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Contributing
On 1/4/2011 9:35 PM, Ron Faile wrote: On 1/4/2011 9:02 PM, Hal Parker wrote: Barbara, Ron Faile has been taking the lead on the user guides, and I've been contributing a bit, along with at least one other person. The Getting Started book is pretty much done (except for making corrections and filling in a few blanks as we learn the answers), so IMO the next step is to work on the Writer Guide. What we are doing is rebranding the OOo Writer Guide chapters and adapting them to LibO: adding info on features that are in LibO but not OOo, deleting or revising references to older versions of OOo, changing screenshots as necessary, that sort of thing. Major revisions are being deferred until later; at this point we just want to get books ready as quickly as possible. Ron has done the first step (applying the LibO template) and possibly the second (changing refs from OOo to LibO). Now we all need to pick chapters and do more detailed work. You'll find links to the files in the lower part of the table on this page, http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Development and below that, the template. The workflow description at the top --at least the bits about putting things into different folders-- does not correspond to the way we're doing things at the moment; we're just replacing the files with updated ones. All the old files stay on the wiki and can be recovered at any time. So basically what you do is: pick a chapter, put your name in the checkout column so others know the file is being worked on, do whatever is necessary (with change tracking on), put the file back, change the feedback column to BACK (so Ron knows it's ready for him to check), and remove your name from the checkout column. If you're not sure how to replace a file on the wiki, just ask. I hope I described that process correctly; if not, I'm sure David or Ron will correct me. Hal Hi Barbara, all. Been busy today or would have gotten back sooner. Hal is right, the best place to start is on the Writer Guide chapters. The basic rebranding is done, but they need to be reviewed, have formatting for the tables and tips boxes updated and replace any screenshots that need it. I'd have a look at one of the Getting Started chapters to see what we're aiming for. Then install the chapter template on the development page (in resources) and checkout a chapter. There is a zip file next to the template with all the screenshots I've done. That should make it easier to update them as you go. And feel free to ask any questions you may have. When you install the template and open one of the chapters for the first time, it will ask you about updating the links, say yes (there were some minor updates to the template after the Writer guide files were uploaded). Also I realize that all the style names have OOo instead of LibO. Seems like changing the names causes some hicups with custom styles are applied, so I have left that for a later time. Welcome to the team! Ron OK, I'd like to work on Chapter 9, Working with Tables. I see that I should put my wiki ID (Dupreyb) in the Checkout column. The existing file already is using the template, so would there still be a need for me to install that anywhere? Where am I supposed to work on the chapter? It would seem that there's a resources development page, but I don't know where or whether that is what is meant to be used as a workspace -- or maybe there's now or soon to be an Alfresco location where I can work in Writer. Once the chapter .odt file is in the right place, I can turn on change tracking (and versioning?) and make the changes; I've gotten the Getting Started with Writer chapter for reference, and I'm assuming that any screenshots used there that are relevant in the Tables chapter are in the zip file. Might I need any others, and if so, how should I go about acquiring them? (Presumably using Paint on a print-screen image is not sufficient!) Is there some definitive list of the differences between the currently-described features and operation, and new ones LibO has, or is this a matter of trying the capabilities in LibO? Eventually, I'll also need to know how to put the file where it can be reviewed (if it doesn't just stay where it is, with the appropriate control table update to show it's ready). And if something is supposed to be done in the control table's Document Development column, and the associated file (which is apparently a kind of note holder for communication with the team), who sets that up, where, and how is it updated? Sorry if all this is really obvious -- but the first time is always the hardest, right? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Contributing
On 1/4/2011 4:21 PM, David Nelson wrote: Hi Barbara, :-) Well, that's quite a resume you have, and you'd certainly be a valuable asset for the docs team. Thanks! At the present time, there's not yet a great deal of hard organization within the LibreOffice documentation project. This is something that will hopefully change. I'm about the closest thing there is to a docs team lead at present, batting for LibO. I'm interested in working up an internal flow and organization for LibO documentation, and I recently set up an Alfresco server for that at https://documentation.traduction.biz. There are currently about 8 docs team members with accounts there. If you're interested, let me know and I'll give you an account there, too. If you think I'd be useful there, count me in! Along the way, I've also done quite a lot of process work (process documentation, coordinating departmental processes, doing evaluations relative to the Capability Maturity Model, etc.) and if that's applicable at all (given the fact that I really know very little about the existing process!) I'd be glad to help. There's not much happening on Alfresco yet. This is certainly because it's new and I haven't had time to lead the way and start a tangible work project there yet. I'm busy with other work until the 10th, so it will happen shortly after that. After that, it depends on whether docs contributors start taking it up as a tool. If they do, then either that Alfresco system will get integrated into the TDF Web infrastructure, or another Alfresco will be set up and there will be a migration of workflow and data. Jean has been posting about oooauthors/odfauthors. It's pretty much up to you to decide how, what and where you want to contribute. You're welcome to give me a buzz if I can be of any help to you. ;-) David Nelson I guess I'll start by looking at what is on the wiki to-do list from your earlier post (and installing LibO, of course). And feel free to point me in any direction you'd like. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Contributing
On 1/4/2011 2:25 PM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote: On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 09:17 -0600, Barbara Duprey wrote: On 1/4/2011 1:57 AM, David Nelson wrote: Some people like to work on LibreOffice documentation via the oooauthors site [2]... (Surprised to see the reference to the oooauthors site, thought there'd be a separate one!) Space at the OOoAuthors website was offered, but AFAIK no one from LibreOffice is using it. The LibreOffice docs team are currently evaluating Alfresco; if you're interested in participating in that evaluation, ask for a login. I don't know if I'd have any real contribution to make there -- I haven't been involved in the process to this point to have a good basis for evaluation. Related info: OOoAuthors will soon be changing its name to ODFAuthors and moving to a server run by the German organisation that is hosting The Document Foundation. ODFAuthors will be available as a resource to OpenOffice.org, LibreOffice, or other community groups producing documentation for open source programs. --Jean Great move! Sounds like a very strong measure in support of ODF, and much better than splitting the communities entirely apart. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [libreoffice-documentation] Contributing
On 1/4/2011 1:57 AM, David Nelson wrote: Hi Barbara, :-) You could try telling us briefly about your degree of experience in documentation-writing? We might be able to better advise you in that case... ;-) You could also take a look at [1], where you will see a list of documentation still needing to be drafted Some people like to work on LibreOffice documentation via the oooauthors site [2]... What are you interested in doing? [1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation#Documentation_Still_To_Be_Drafted [2] http://oooauthors.org David Nelson I was a computer programmer with IBM's Federal Systems Division for 28 years (1966-94), working on things like the Apollo program, air traffic control, and satellite command and control. During that time, I did a very large amount of technical writing, for the last ten years or so in BookMaster (IBM's tagged markup language), including design specifications, course material, user's guides, proposals, and so on. After IBM sold FSD, I (along with about 2000 others!) was declared "surplus to their requirements" (i.e., laid off); I'm now officially an IBM retiree. After that I did some contract work; one job was document conversion of about 15 volumes of IBM technical documentation from HTML to two other documentation languages using Perl on Unix, another was writing some of the built-in help for a couple of IBM products, another was writing PowerPoint courseware for a couple of Tivoli products. Since then, I've done a lot of "odds and ends" for personal/home business use -- mostly using Writer, with the largest project being user's guides for some games my son wrote. I've also used Base, designing a system for a volunteer activity tracking deed restriction violations, Calc for a few quick-and-dirty spreadsheets, and a very small amount of work in Impress. I'd be interested in writing, editing, proofreading -- whatever is most needed. At the moment I have OOo 3.1.1 on several Windows systems, with my primary computer Win7. I typically don't install betas and wait a while after release to start using products, but obviously I'd be willing to get LibO. My primary focus is on helping users, especially new users, and I've been pretty active on the OOo help and discuss mailing lists, and lately the LibO versions of those. I'll check out that wiki reference, thanks! (Surprised to see the reference to the oooauthors site, thought there'd be a separate one!) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[libreoffice-documentation] Contributing
I'd be glad to help with documentation -- how can I start being useful? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***