I have to agree with Jean that the changes are usability improvements
for the program, so I think in the long run it's worth it.
In the short-run, however, I do have a number of concerns as it
relates to the documentation side of things. As an example, in the
case of my documentation, I would have to make the changes in a number
of places: This would include:
1. changes to the instructions itself within the lessons.
2. would have to re-create some screenshots / illustrations that
coincide with the instruction changes.
3. not only would I need to apply those changes to the printed
documentation itself, but also make the same changes to the manuscript
downloads and to the Moodle Course Package docuemntation as well.
4. in the case of the Moodle Course Package, not only would the lesson
documentation and its related illustrations need to be changed, but
quiz/ exam questions found within the package would also have to be
reviewed and changed as well.
5. in the case of making the changes to the printed documentation, the
presses already have the current edition printed and available. So
the copies that are already in distribution would contain instructions
that wouldn't reflect the changes being proposed for 3.1
6. if the changes in question for 3.1 result in having to add
additional pages to the document, then I would have to consider that
to be a new edition in the eyes of distributors / printing presses
and, therefore, a new ISBN number would have to be assigned and the
current edition would have to be taken out of circulation. This
usually takes about 30-60 days in itself for the process to take
place, even after all of the documentation changes have taken place
and sent to the presses.
Most of the points mentioned above would not only affect the
documentation I have created, but for other authors as well who have
either already released documentation or are perhaps in the final
stages of releasing documentation from the presses to book retailers /
distributors.
Moreover, I also have to consider the end-users who utilize my
documentation as well. My book is utilized predominately by education
institutions who have adopted the documentation for use in classes.
If the changes proposed are made in 3.1, then what happens to these
schools is that the books they just bought or adopted (in the case of
paperback adoptions) or electronic copies they made photocopies of are
now obselete in a matter of a very short period of time. They would
then either:
a) have to buy new copies of the book (not a very good option at all
for those who have just chosen to adopt OOo 3.0 and have purchased
paperback copies for use in the classroom)
b) have to make new photocopies of the updated documentation for
distributing in classes (again, will cost additional money, time and
hassle for instructors),
c) students who purchased new paperback copies (because of it being
the new edition related to OOo 3.0) all of a sudden couldn't resell it
at the end of the semester because I may have to release another
edition to reflect the changes in 3.1 (see #6 above), or
d) instructors would have to improvise their instruction in the
classroom around the differences in 3.1 and the documentation they
have, which may result in turning off some instructors and
administrators who have recently decided to adopt OOo in lieu of other
office productivity suites (which has happened, by the way).
So ideally, from an author's point-of-view, it is best to make
fundamental changes to software such as menu changes, interface
changes, etc. part of a major software update release (ie version 3.0
4.0, 5.0, etc.).
Adding new features in point releases are okay; an author's
documentation may not include details about a new feature, but at
least the instruction provided in an author's documentation isn't
obselete like it is when menu changes or interface changes are made in
point releases.
However, if such changes are made before then, it would take many
authors, including myself, about 90-120 days to have those changes be
reflected in our documentation and would need that amount of time
before the release of the OOo software update in order to make
available doumentation that accurately reflects those changes.
Hope this information helps and provides some insight from a document
creator's point-of-view.
Best regards,
Gabriel Gurley
Author, "A Conceptual Guide to OpenOffice.org 3"
Quoting Uwe Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi,
some authors of OOo documentation may have read or missed the following
discussion in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list.
Max, who is a very respected code contributor (we all must thank him
for the fine new notes in Writer) wants to change the names and
positions of some odd menu entries:
http://ux.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=2360
or read
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/MinorMenuAdjustments
for the facts without discussion.
This is certainly a welcome change, but it may have quite an impact on
existing or new documentation. What do you - as the authors of OOo 3.x
documentation - think about the changes?
Uwe
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Technical Writer
StarOffice - Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Hamburg, Germany
http://documentation.openoffice.org/
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation
http://blogs.sun.com/oootnt
http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
