The recent rewrite of the Ataxx docs raises a point: "When the Animation checkbox is selected, the pieces will visually change when captured. The animation is different for each tile set. [NOTE: This feature is really buggy. When the checkbox isn't selected, the program doesn't work and suffers from a wide variety of rendering bugs. Should I mention this in the documentation?]" (quote from http://live.gnome.org/DocumentationProject/AttaxDocumentation )
I know that the Style Guide says not to make up for inadequacies of the software [1], because as I think Shaun once put it, the user will shout at the screen "Don't tell me it sucks, FIX IT!" But... if we gloss over problems and don't acknowledge them, the user might shout "How can you seriously think this is the right way to design an interface?" (I scream this at GIMP every time I use it.) There is also the matter that GNOME is not produced in the same way as corporate software. We *want* our users to become contributors. Is there a middle ground? If a certain function or component may be buggy, or a procedure is tediously complex (adding a way to switch keyboard layouts when you've just installed new ones, for example, bug 326138), could we signal this to the users, and mention (briefly) that GNOME developers are working on this but could use help? I'd appreciate your thoughts on this. If this is something we think should be done, we could perhaps devise a short sentence we can use each time that links to the "contributing to gnome" section of the user guide. [1] http://developer.gnome.org/documents/style-guide/fundamentals-3.html and http://developer.gnome.org/documents/style-guide/usability-non-objectives.html Joachim ___________________________________________________________ All New Yahoo! Mail Tired of [EMAIL PROTECTED]@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html _______________________________________________ gnome-doc-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list
