Hi Folks,
The message below and my in-line reply is the tail-end of an off-list
email exchange Cathy and I have been having over the last couple of days
and we felt it might be of some interest to others here.
Hi Dave,
Thank you for the thorough answer.
It sounds like you are suggesting working on the Getting Started guide
as a writer. Is that correct?
Not exactly, My thoughts are that since you had already been reviewing
the published Writer guide, you might wish to turn your attention to the
Writer chapter of the GS Guide.
If so, it is probably not for me because I am definitely more comfortable as a reviewer.
Understood, but to be honest there is not a vast difference between
revising/updating and reviewing chapters of the guides. The basic
workflow is that one of us takes a single chapter of an existing guide
(in this instance the 5.2 GS Guide) to work on and updates those parts
of the chapter that have or will change for 6.0 Then put the updated
chapter into the "Drafts" folder on the Authors website. Someone else
then picks up our draft, edits and comments what they believe to be
necessary and returns their edit of the chapter into the "Feedback"
folder on the Authors website.
The concept is we each take a "small bite" of the job and between us we
get the whole job done. The one thing none of us should try and do is to
take a whole guide and try to rewrite the entire thing on our own. In
the history of LO I have only seen this done once by a a guy from the
German language project, who produced "The Base Handbook", but even
though a skilled writer with a solid knowledge of databases, he had the
support and cooperation of an 8 person team.
Obviously, revising/updating will be easier for someone with technical
writing experience and knowledge of the software, but anyone (even me)
can do it. In order to help all authors identify the updates and
additions to the software since the last published guide, I am about to
publish a wiki page outlining those points that impact on the guides.
A few things keep in mind:
o We can all overlook things and make mistakes,
but that's part of what the review stage is intended to fix.
o When we review other team members updates/revisions,
we are working together, not attacking their efforts.
o If none of us creates the initial draft of a chapter,
there will never be anything to review.
However, I could consider.
Is the idea to use 5.2 as the template and just update the relevant
areas where the program has changed?
That's exactly what I was proposing for the GS guide. Namely, grab the
Writer chapter of the 5.2 Getting Started Guide from:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/f/f1/GS5204-GettingStartedWithWriter.odt
and have fun.
It would be great to have an idea of who else is involved in this
effort.
Even though we sometimes speak of "Team Members", there is no formal
structure, because we are all volunteer contributors to an open source
project, where there is no obligation placed on any of us. The only
exception is Oliver, contracted as a consultant by the TDF as Project
Lead to help move the Documentation project forward, but in the process
Oliver has contributed substantial changes, additions and improvements,
especially in the area of the software's on and off line help facilities.
A list of contributors with their backgrounds, interests,
pictures, or whatever they would like to share could make participation
in this effort feel more connected and vital.
I understand your sentiments, but not everyone wants/likes to publicly
share this kind of information and as previously mentioned no project
contributors are under any obligation. The closest thing you will find
to formal identification of team contributors is to look at the preface
of the various guides. By following this list you will come to recognize
"the regulars".
No doubt this has been
thought about before and there is little funding. However, it could be
done relatively easily and I think it would help the project, especially
newcomers like me.
I don't believe that funding, if any, would be an issue here. To the
best of my knowledge this has not been proposed previously. Maybe this
could be added to the agenda for our on-line meeting on August 2nd. and
if there were sufficient interest we could create a documentation wiki page.
The notes I have seen from the calls are a bit inscrutable so I haven't
been able to tell if it makes sense to join them.
Yes, LO and TDF meeting notes are a kind of shorthand and take a bit of
getting used to. They are mostly intended as a road map of planned
objectives.
That said, I will
participate in the next call if I can (will be traveling that day).
It would be great if you and anyone else reading this could join us at
the next meeting. They tend to reasonably short and informal.
Thanks again.
Cathy
I would also like to take this opportunity to echo echo Oliver's welcome
and extend my thanks to all of you who were kind enough to respond to my
"Call for help" post. Please do subscribe to the docs mailing list and
come say hello.
Regards
Dave
