Hi Rick, I didn't mean to trash it. But I felt that most of the content of the first couple of pages should go some place else.
Of course, I'm just another guy. No particular reason why I am right and you are wrong. That's why we have Jean and Janet here to guide us. Cheers, Daniel. On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 10:40:48AM +0000, Rick Barnes wrote: > Daniel, > > I'm not exactly sure what you want to have, a User's guide or a > brochure. Since you just began editing my work I am assuming that you > will trash the rest of the content much the same. When I took the > Chapter over I was told by Jean to lengthen it, to add content: > > ************************BEGIN quoted text********************* > > This is a tiny chapter. Only a couple of pages of content. <snip> > > If you can think of content that should be added to this chapter, please > go ahead and do so. > > At the moment I don't have time to add content (I truly wish I did have > time), but I'd like to make some observations, now that I've had a > better look at the chapter. > > I think what you've got is good, but ... > > I see three audiences for this chapter: > (1) New users not migrating from another major office suite. > (2) New users who are migrating from another major office suite. > (3) People upgrading from OOo 1.x. > > The comparison of features tables are good for people in group 1, but > putting on my "new OOo user" hat, I'm left wondering "is that all there > is?" I think a more detailed listing (not comparison) of some features > might help. > > A "What's new in 2.0" section would be really good, especially for the > people in group 3. > > For group 1, the more detailed listing -- and brief description -- of > features would be good too. For one thing, some of these people will not > be aware of many of the things an office suite can do. For another, the > listing can help lead readers to the chapters (or guides) describing how > (and why) to use those features. > > Jean > > *************************END quoted text********************* > > > I don't think my text is that complex...in fact it is very informative. > It contains information that you would need to spend some time finding > on the OOo website and from several other sources. I believe that the > text on Open Source and OOo's licensing speaks to "New users who are > migrating from another major office suite." Switching from proprietary > software to F/OSS is a MAJOR deal. They need to know why F/OSS is > better, or at least comparable. > > Your comment "This entire paragraph is intended for current 1.x users. > Though this is an important audience, this isn't the right place for > that kind of information." is wrong since the paragraph ends with the > line: "If you are new to OpenOffice.org, its Open Source development, > and the vibrant community that produces it, you will find it beneficial > to read this chapter." > > You suggest "some of your introductory content should be relocated to > appendices (e.g. "history of OOo")" if this were a research paper or > thesis, I might agree. But I would say that most users NEVER look in an > Appendix for such content...shortcut keys or support information, maybe > (but only in desperation), but fluff like history, never! If my text > "bores" them they can skip to the section they want to read...an odd > thing about your audience is that they will skip what they think is > unnecessary and read only what they want. You seem to think that they > will be insulted and not finish reading the chapter? > > Look at some of the version 1.x docs...compare them with professional > docs and you will see that the OOo docs lack depth (my opinion as a > user. I'm not a professional technical writer). I looked them over as a > prospective user and found them useless for the most part...this is the > reason I thought I might be useful here. > > I know that my grammar is poor and I tend to be wordy and use > colloquialisms, so I accept editing on that level. The funny thing is > you even deleted entire sections that came from _your_ first draft. > > I'm not discouraged...angry is a better word. I just wasted a lot of > time on this document (there was a lot of research required for this > chapter, too). I need some time to decide whether I want to continue > with this project. My time is valuable whether I donate it or get paid > for it. > > You might as well finish this chapter now! I've lost the taste for this > nonsense right now. Maybe you folks should try "mentoring" people with > their first solo work so that they do not waste time on useless content. > > "Don't get discouraged..."? > > On Tue, 2005-02-22 at 20:23 -0500, Daniel Carrera wrote: > > Hi Rick, > > > > I have uploaded a reviewed version of the file. > > > > http://oooauthors.org/groups/authors/userguide2/gettingstarted/feedback/What_is_OOo_22Feb05_RB_DC.sxw/file_view > > > > You obviously know the subject matter well. But that has caused you to > > write a rather complex document. In my opinion, it violates the principle > > of Plain English. That is, using the simplest terms and explanations that > > will get a point accross. It is hard to overstate the importance of this. > > I also think that some of your introductory content should be relocated to > > appendices (e.g. "history of OOo"). We don't want users to feel like they > > need to know all the details to answer the question "what is OOo?". > > > > Don't get discouraged Rick. Things will get easier, I promise. Getting the > > first chapter published is by far the hardest, because you have to deal > > with a lot of tech writing issues. The next chapter is easier, and the > > next one is easier yet. > > > > Cheers, > > Daniel. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 04:24:47PM +0000, Rick Barnes wrote: > > > I have just uploaded a new draft of the "What is OOo?" chapter, the last > > > reviews were fairly light...is this close to publishing??? > > > > > -- > Regards, > > Rick Barnes > www.nostabo.net > > ******************************************************************* > PRIVILEGED - PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL > This electronic mail is solely for the use of the addressee and may > contain information which is confidential or privileged. If you receive > this electronic mail in error, please delete it from your system > immediately and notify the sender by electronic mail or using any of the > contact details noted herein. > > This e-mail sent via Evolution 2.0.3 running on a Linux 2.6.10 kernel. -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org |
