[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-commits
Subject:    Re: www/areas/usability/hig
From:       Frans Englich <frans.englich () telia ! com>
Date:       2004-08-19 19:16:51
Message-ID: 200408191916.51793.frans.englich () telia ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thursday 19 August 2004 01:50, Aaron Seigo wrote:
> On Thursday 19 August 2004 03:15, Frans Englich wrote:
> > Initial commit:  The revitalization of the KDE Human Interface Guidelines
>
> please don't bother touching this document until at least after aKademy.

That's an interesting comment.

> i 
> simply don't want your efforts to become wasted efforts due to acting
> independently and out of sync with the rest of the project.
>
> i've tried to communicate this message on the kde-usability list politely
> and succinctly but i'll just say it bluntly at this point: any editting of
> this document right now without buy in from the developers or the usability
> people who are coming on board is a waste of time. this is not the sort of
> endeavour that one person can simply plow ahead and do; it requires
> coordination and team effort, which we simply do not have in place now but
> will by the end of the month. ok?

I repeat what I wrote in the letter you reply to: "Did not do any semantical 
changes". I further wrote: "Next commit will be an readability edit". In 
other words, no changes to its meaning or semantics have been done, or will 
be done. I have some questions:
* How will this crash with the revolution at aKademy?
* What part of this requires coordination(it's docbook'ing)?

You claim I work in isolation. I have hinted on at least three list I am 
working on docbook'ing the HIG. Especially, I wrote as a reply[1] to you on 
kde-usability:
"Are you planning to actually extend the guidelines at aKademy? 
Then it could be a good idea of me to prioritize the docbook'ing and move to 
usability.kde.org."

But you did not reply. Neither did anyone else, or (negatively) to any of the 
other posts. 

You write above: "I simply don't want your efforts to become wasted efforts 
due to acting independently and out of sync with the rest of the project."

It's the other way around. I have mentioned publicly what I'm doing. You talk 
about efforts and people, but not a single word from them on kde-usability or 
in the KDE community -- no code, articles, documents or commits. If projects 
should stall because of these people we haven't heard a sound from -- who's 
acting independently then? All these resources may exist, but it's not me who 
is in isolation, and it's not me who will become out of sync with the rest of 
the project. Anyone who join picks up state of the art, whatever that is(of 
course).
You talk about "website strategy", but I actually get work done(HIG, KDE 
Usability Articles).  

Anyone who have worked with usability in KDE knows how much vapor ideas/ware 
that's floating. Hence, I orientate strongly around what is real. Your 
initial comments reminds of one of the KControl threads where you mention "a 
lot of people" wants to give input -- but where are they? Benjamin and I, for 
example, have created plenty of docs+prototypes. Where are the work of all 
those people which have all that importance to say? If their only way of 
contributing is on aKademy, we won't get far in the long run. kde-usability 
is truly a mess, but some of us gets our hands dirty and work there anyway -- 
actually, the only work done at all emerges from that list(and 
openusability.org). 

> > 
> > What is the purpose of this?
> >
> > * Make it readable and attractive.
>
> honestly, the current layout of the UIG is not nearly what can be achieved
> or what we really need for our going-forward needs. 

Referring to the old or new? The new one has a new structure, as written in 
the previous letter.

> it was a great early 
> step and quite important to the development and consistency of KDE, but a
> much richer document is order at this point. prettying up what exists is
> not in order, quite frankly.

I'm not following you. You mean doing a complete rewrite the HIG? 

You label my work as "prettying" -- do you need an explanation to how docbook 
makes maintenance/content-creation easier, and how the PHP integration makes 
the document have a larger impact on the KDE organization?

But right, no doubt it needs to have better content, reading the GNOME/OSX HIG 
makes one want to hide. Perhaps it wasn't a bad idea hiding it in the 
closet :}

>
> > The HIG will now have a proper layout
> > and be one click away, instead of being a little monster stuffed away
> > behind a menu 4-6(?) hierarchy
>
> and create a fork of it in our CVS. great. now which is the official
> version? 

Could you tell me in what way that is hard to tell? On what grounds do you do 
that assertion?

* The only one who knows about this is subscribers of kde-usability and 
kde-cvs, which have read the commit message. It have not been announced. The 
commit message clearly said 1) It is work in progress("initial commit",  
comments on what follows) and that people shouldn't touch it: "Next commit 
will be an readability edit(don't touch it until that's done)"

* It haven't been linked from usability.kde.org or any other place

(copied)
>now which is the official
> version? 
> i'm sure you'll say it's yours, but i don't know how many others 
> will agree. the more they diverge, the worse this situation will become.

I do of course think it is the right thing to do from a professional 
perspective, otherwise I wouldn't have done it. Furthermore, I'm interested 
in the best solution, and if anyone can tell me another approach is better, I 
will of course listen, and throw my work away, if that's the best thing to 
do.

In a thread about KControl you told me I have gotten a lot of things wrong, 
but didn't tell what. In a thread about aKademy, you smacked me to the 
floor(which I then silently dropped, of course). In this thread, I have been 
told that what I've done is wrong, and crashes with tons of things -- but I 
haven't been told what practically I've done wrong. I'm wondering:

How will this Not be an improvement for anyone who wants to work on the 
content of the HIG? Could you elaborate why it's not? How will this not be a 
great help for the revolution on aKademy? You say "i don't know how many 
others will agree" -- whom and what are you thinking of? You're  saying "no" 
without why.

In other words, I understand you have rather seen it was not done at all, but 
I want to know practically what you dislike.

Remember, what this does is making it easier to create content, and promotes 
the existing content.

If anyone have something to say, don't hesitate.


			Frans

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]