On 01/03/2013 06:08 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.at To: Jonathan Wilkes jancsika@yahoo.com Cc: Pd List pd-list@iem.at Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2013 4:52 PM Subject: Re: [PD] translate the Start Here! page
On 01/02/2013 06:27 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.at To: Jonathan Wilkes jancsika@yahoo.com Cc: Pd List pd-list@iem.at Sent: Wednesday, January 2, 2013 10:05 AM Subject: Re: [PD] translate the Start Here! page
On Jan 1, 2013, at 4:02 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@at.or.at To: Pd List pd-list@iem.at Cc: Sent: Tuesday, January 1, 2013 2:35 PM Subject: [PD] translate the Start Here! page
I just had another thought as for a way to provide more
native-language
help
in Pd-extended. In the Help menu is the "Start
Here!" item
which
takes you to http://puredata.info/docs/StartHere. I've made it
possible to set
that URL
in the translation, so there can be
http://puredata.info/docs/PourCommencer and
http://puredata.info/docs/%E3%81%93%E3%81%93%E3%81%8B%E3%82%89%E5%A7%8B%E3%8... etc. That page is a short
wiki
page to tell people where they can get more help for learning
Pd in
their
native language.
Also, that link could point to any webpage, it doesn't
need to be
puredata.info. But it should be a community oriented site
where people
can
edit the page to improve it, IMHO.
To change the URL in your language, edit the translation:
https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/puredata/resource/pd-extended/
.hc
You should update that page before encouraging translation.
Otherwise
the translators will include links to unmaintained projects like
the Pd
FLOSS
Manual as has already happened.
Which link do you think should be removed? There isn't an official
maintainer to the FLOSS Manuals english book, but its still quite good.
The FLOSS Pure Data Manual has a big, static, unmaintainable list of objects by category that gets more out of date every time pd-extended drops or adds a library.
Example of how this problem manifests itself:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.multimedia.puredata.general/82173/focus=8...
Notice that this user presumably followed a very reasonable path to finding objects: puredata.info -> FLOSS Manual -> FLOSS Manual Object List
-> broken objects
in his/her instance of Pd.
Also notice that a large portion of the FLOSS Manual object list
doesn't even
specify what library the externals belong to.
Also notice that the specific objects which the user asked about
weren't even
updated in the manual after the thread had ended, nor to date.
Also notice that neither you nor I are the least bit interested in fixing
these
problems in the FLOSS manual, and we're especially not interested in
taking
it on as a long term project. Who does that leave? If it leaves anyone wouldn't their time be better spent fixing the doc problems listed on
the tracker
than etching in stone a description of a moving target?
That listing is indeed problematic, but I think most of the problems could be addressed by better describing what that listing is. For example, the user in that thread was not aware of how to load libraries, i.e. [import] or [declare -lib].
That's irrelevant in the case of object classes for which the library isn't even listed.
That's something that should be described in that book anyhow.
I'm very much interested in maintaining the FLOSS manuals book, and I've contributed to it in the past. These days, my time for Pd is quite limited. But I will try to find time to update key bits like that.
If you do find the time just use it to delete the entire static table of objects and replace it with the sentence "Click the Help menu and choose Search". Seriously, why would anyone spend time maintaining that when a) Pd vanilla users already have a static list with descriptions and b) Pd-extended now allows you to search by category?
Yes, searching makes much more sense most of the time. And there is even the option for browsing in Pd-extended as well. I'm ok with removing that section, but I think we should try to get more input from people before removing it.
One thing that should be easy to do is to 'unpublish' that section, so that it would only be visible in the edit mode. Then we can see who complains.
.hc