Hey Darrell, You've raised the release notes issue repeatedly, and I've heard you. I just do not give it the voluminous weight that you seem to do in this situation. <grin> If someone reports a bug on the list and I respond to them saying that I think I've fixed it in an update, I don't think I necessarily need to create a release log entry in the script's documentation and on script central. Each step is additional work and I try to prioritize. Explaining what was fixed usually requires reference to other aspects to be clear, and the result can be that the release note is nearly as long as the original paragraph of documentation. Once again, these are generally small, modular components that either work or not for someone.
If a script is working for you, then don't feel you need to update it. You can be sure that I try my best not to have any regressions, so an update can generally be assumed to work at least as well as its predecessor. Certainly, I would give high priority to fixing any regression that is reported. I meant what I said about the wiki. Programmers are often not the best documenters. So, if you do not feel you are a programmer, perhaps writing ttutorials or news reports that fill in voids could be a particularly valuable way that you can contribute. I know you are a good writer from your blog! Regards, Jamal On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Darrell Shandrow wrote: > Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:28:44 -0700 > From: Darrell Shandrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: New Direct Text package > > Hey Jamal, > > As far as the Direct Text script is concerned, I was just giving some > friendly advice about possibly giving an example of something that does not > work for the benefit of beginner and intermediate users. I should've > realized what you were talking about immediately, but, well, I'm an advanced > user... :-) The only item below that I'm really thinking is a show stopper > is the release notes for each update. Even as an advanced user, when I'm > looking to update something on my computer, I want at least a brief summary > of what has changed before I make a commitment. You've sort of brought this > need forward through the release of Install Packages. That script, once > installed, allows the user to immediately add any script from SC to their > Window-Eyes profile with almost no fuss at all. People are going to use this > feature. That makes it even more critical to include release notes with > updates. Please see Jeff Bishop's Winamp scripts for an excellent example of > how to supply concise release notes. I'm sorry. I know your efforts are all > voluntary. I definitely appreciate the many hundreds of hours you must have > put into your scripts thus far. I'm also sorry that, when it comes to > letting the user base know what has changed, I must continue to be adamant. > I'd go so far as to say that a change log or release notes ought to, > somehow, be required by GW Micro in order to post on SC... > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jamal Mazrui" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 1:07 PM > Subject: Re: New Direct Text package > > > Hey Darrell, I think we'll have to agree to disagree about some of this. > Your list made no mention of user responsibility. I spent a few hours > developing that script. I think its documentation, distributed with the > script, contained the answers to the questions you posed about what > controls were supported and why the keys you mentioned did not have the > results you desired. It would have taken a couple minutes to reread the > paragraph of documentation. > > I have had few complaints about my documentation efforts. I am not saying > the documentation cannot be improved, but the needed information seems to > generally be found by users. Please consider contributing wiki articles to > Script Central that better explain what volunteer scripters have not done > as well as possible. <smile> > > Jamal > On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, > Darrell Shandrow wrote: > > > Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 12:03:40 -0700 > > From: Darrell Shandrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: New Direct Text package > > > > Hey Jamal, > > > > Understood. I'm just saying you may wish to clearly indicate a specific > > example, such as use of the backspace, of a situation not covered by these > > scripts. It even took me a few minutes to understand why it did not > > improve > > my editing issues. :-) Let's all keep in mind that end users are now going > > to be downloading these scripts. They should have the following: > > > > 1. Obviously, solid code that works. :-) > > 2. They should be distributed using the established Window-Eyes Package > > Manager. > > 3. They should include clear, user friendly documentation. > > 4. Release notes, even if brief, should be provided with each and every > > update. > > 5. Relevant announcements, release notes and other information should be > > in > > SC. > > 6. The user should not have to rely on mailing lists to get critical > > information about a script they may be running. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jamal Mazrui" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 9:55 AM > > Subject: Re: New Direct Text package > > > > > > Hi Darrell, > > Yes -- as documented -- the script currently applies only to > > hotkeys that read the current character, word, or line in either an Edit > > or RichEdit control. Cursoring keys such as Backspace or Delete are not > > affected. I agree that would be a desirable enhancement, but technically > > it is more challenging. The reason is that the API lets a script inject > > itself into hotkey actions but not cursoring key actions at this time. > > > > Jamal > > On Mon, 22 Sep 2008, Darrell > > Shandrow wrote: > > > > > Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 05:46:35 -0700 > > > From: Darrell Shandrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Reply-To: [email protected] > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: New Direct Text package > > > > > > Hello again Jamal, > > > > > > Hmm. Do I understand correctly that this script may not apply to use of > > > keys > > > like backspace and delete? Perhaps, that's my issue here... :-) If this > > > is > > > the case, you may want to consider making this clear in the script's > > > documentation. > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Darrell Shandrow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 5:41 AM > > > Subject: Re: New Direct Text package > > > > > > > > > Hello Jamal, > > > > > > In which editing situations is this script supposed to work? I'm writing > > > a > > > message in Outlook Express right now, and several OSM related editing > > > problems I've previously reported still exist. Does it just not yet work > > > in > > > this particular editing control? The potential for this script is quite > > > exciting, indeed, as editing problems associated with the OSM are > > > annoying > > > to say the least. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Jamal Mazrui" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 5:32 AM > > > Subject: New Direct Text package > > > > > > > > > Direct Text 1.0 > > > > > > When focus is in an Edit or RichEdit control, this script causes the > > > Window-Eyes hotkeys for reading the cursor character, word, or line to > > > obtain text directly from the control rather than from the off screen > > > model. To toggle off this direct reading, press Alt-Insert-D. Note > > > that > > > cursor keys that read text after navigation will still use the off > > > screen > > > model. > > > > > > This global script requires GW Toolkit. > > > > > > > > > Jamal > > > > > >
