User documentation

[brucet]

OK. Let's start again.

As users we can help with the documentation of PL. As users we 'think' we know what's needed!!

It needs to be agreed that a simple format is needed. A format that is available to all users. (Wiki may work for some but IMHO any documentation needs to be able to be downloaded and/or printable).
A simple means of controlling the document is also needed otherwise all sorts of 'miss-information' may be added that will only confuse the very purpose of the exercise. As a result one or two users need to be responsible for the co-ordination. Yes it means work and responsibility.

I've been down this track before. There is always lots of talk and great ideas. But it needs dedication to see it through. I've co-ordinated a number of projects, from simple easy tasks to national projects, and none of them are 'easy'.

Here's a starting idea that could work as an example.
http://video-books.net/paintshoppro/tut ... ionary.htm
Get something like this done and then think grander ideas.

However I would only be comfortable with the blessings of the developers.

regards

[photoken]

That sample "dictionary" looks good, and organizing it according to menu items makes sense.

It seems to me that a simple Excel spreadsheet would be the way to go -- one column for the PS term, another column for the PL equivalent.

That spreadsheet could be provided for each of the languages supported by PL.

[Alan9940]

Yes, I like that idea too! Any basic list should be simple and easy to follow.

Regarding Ken's suggestion of an Excel spreadsheet, I would caution that not everyone owns Office. If only one or two people are to be the owners of the document and will be responsible for updates, that's fine, but IMO it needs to be finalized in a more universal format that's easily displayed and printed by everyone; PDF, maybe?

Assuming this thread is the control point for this effort, I will watch for further developments.

Kind regards,
Alan

[photoken]

Regarding Ken's suggestion of an Excel spreadsheet, I would caution that not everyone owns Office.

True enough, but Excel is such a "standard", and the spreadsheet would be so simple (two columns of text, and that's it) that any open source spreadsheet program should be able to read it.

But this is just a suggestion for the "master" list.

(It occurs to me that that "master" spreadsheet could be expanded to include columns for the other languages, too. That might make it easier for the maintainer to keep things organized.)

If only one or two people are to be the owners of the document and will be responsible for updates, that's fine, but IMO it needs to be finalized in a more universal format that's easily displayed and printed by everyone; PDF, maybe?

I agree. The nice thing about the spreadsheet is that it's simple to add more rows wherever they're needed. As I recall, it's easy to export the thing out of Excel as a simple text list for displaying here. Also, it should be straightforward to export the final version of the spreadsheet to other formats like PDF or a HTML document.

[Herbert123]

Perhaps working in a Google Sheets document would work? That way it can be easily shared and managed. No need for local files. And the document can be saves as pdf.

[brucet]

If you want to go down the spreadsheet route then I would suggest OpenOffice. Free and reads and writes many files including Excel. (I intermix OpenOffice and Excel files every day). OpenOffice has almost all Excel features. http://www.openoffice.org/download/
PDF's are fine but not everyone can edit PDF's.

The beauty of a spreadsheet is that the first column can be PL. Every other column could be devoted to the equivalent of many other editors. Thus any new feature in PL can be added. Then as users translate those new features in other editors they can be included.

The example I gave in the first post could make an excellent starting point. However it is a few years old.
Anyone want to give it a go?

Again I would like to hear from the developers. Before we cross a line that annoys them

regards

[photoken]

FWIW, searching the Web for "Photoshop Menus" yielded this result:
http://examples.oreilly.com/9780596522964/appd.pdf

[Gerhard Huber]

Again I would like to hear from the developers. Before we cross a line that annoys them

Sorry, but we have not enough time to support the project actively. But I think it's a good idea.

[maxwell]

I think most users are looking for an equivalent of a Photoshop tool in Photoline. Thus, starting with Photoline and looking for equivalents of other image processing software makes their search more complicated. For those of us working for some years with Photoline no list or spreadsheet is necessary. Perhaps for those coming from other image processing software like Paintshop Pro, Photo Plus or ... further information would be helpful. My list/spreadsheet was the result of performing PS image processing described by Katrin Eismann, Scott Skelby and Dan Margulis in Photoline. Having in the beginning the same problems with Photoline as most of us, I started to write them down (in the moment more than 350 pages). Till now, I found no example of PS processing which could not also be conducted in Photoline.

Josef

[photoken]

I think most users are looking for an equivalent of a Photoshop tool in Photoline. Thus, starting with Photoline and looking for equivalents of other image processing software makes their search more complicated.

Yes, I agree.

[StephaneB]

Again I would like to hear from the developers. Before we cross a line that annoys them

Sorry, but we have not enough time to support the project actively. But I think it's a good idea.

Guys,

Right there you show you've got your priorities very wrong. When users organized to create missing bits of your product, you should know you have a major problem.

This attitude does not inspire confidence at all.

[laienspieler]

Again I would like to hear from the developers. Before we cross a line that annoys them

Sorry, but we have not enough time to support the project actively. But I think it's a good idea.

Guys,

Right there you show you've got your priorities very wrong. When users organized to create missing bits of your product, you should know you have a major problem.

This attitude does not inspire confidence at all.

Why so rude? The brothers really don't deserve this.

[brucet]

StephaneB I have no idea of what you are on about!!!!

Thanks Gerhard. I don't expect you to spend valuable time on this project. I have a background that tells me that it could all go very wrong without the appropriate consent.

The thing is that if this goes ahead then it will be easier for all of us. That in turn should attract more users. More users equals more everything!

regards

[StephaneB]

Sorry, but we have not enough time to support the project actively. But I think it's a good idea.

Guys,

Right there you show you've got your priorities very wrong. When users organized to create missing bits of your product, you should know you have a major problem.

This attitude does not inspire confidence at all.

Why so rude? The brothers really don't deserve this.

I have not been rude.
And they do deserve it.
They ask money for their product, which is of course fine.
But they fail to understand that proper documentation, allowing users to get acquainted with their product is an intrinsic part of the product.
What they are saying is that they don't have the time to deliver a finished product.
That is a flawed business approach.

I suspect the problem is they don't ask enough money to be able to finance the extra bits like the documentation.

Anyway, I think I'll move on. My purpose was not to bad mouth the software, which I suspect to be good, but to stress why in its current state the whole package is not as sell-able as it could be. I think we can all agree that is a shame.

Having before been bitten by going with products supported by very small companies that failed to grow and disappeared because of exactly the same problems, I am not about to make the same mistake again. Really, that post from Mr. Huber told me all I needed to know about what the future holds, or rather does not hold for this software. A good software with an accordingly loyal user base, but very small, with no prospect of growing enough to build a mature business.

I want to thank all the great people who have tried to help. I understand what you're trying to do, but that is not my approach in choosing a tool I expect to use reliably for many years.

[Hoogo]

I have not been rude.
And they do deserve it.
They ask money for their product, which is of course fine.
But they fail to understand that proper documentation, allowing users to get acquainted with their product is an intrinsic part of the product.
What they are saying is that they don't have the time to deliver a finished product.
That is a flawed business approach.

I suspect the problem is they don't ask enough money to be able to finance the extra bits like the documentation.

Anyway, I think I'll move on. My purpose was not to bad mouth the software, which I suspect to be good, but to stress why in its current state the whole package is not as sell-able as it could be. I think we can all agree that is a shame.

Having before been bitten by going with products supported by very small companies that failed to grow and disappeared because of exactly the same problems, I am not about to make the same mistake again. Really, that post from Mr. Huber told me all I needed to know about what the future holds, or rather does not hold for this software. A good software with an accordingly loyal user base, but very small, with no prospect of growing enough to build a mature business.

I want to thank all the great people who have tried to help. I understand what you're trying to do, but that is not my approach in choosing a tool I expect to use reliably for many years.

I understand your priorities and that you bother about future support after investing much time and work to get used to such a software. But I disagree with parts of your reasons.

PL started on Atari ~25 years ago, even the windows port can celebrate its 20th birthday soon. This is Version 19 now, with new versions every 1 or 2 years.
=> Rather mature business, and reliable enough for many years now, I think.

Even I am in this forum now for 10 years already, and I abandoned PSP when it was moved from Yasc to Corel (who imho messed up the PSP I once loved).
=> Bigger companies with lots of employees don't make products better. And we all have seen much bigger companies fail.

You can get support here in this forum, either by experienced users or by developers themselves. If you ever had a look into forums at Adobe, you will appreciate this.

The business decisions about PL are fortunately none of my business. Yes, every now and then the tides go high about the documentation, or the design of the program, or the usage of the program, or the webpage... And every time the public agrees that it would sell so much better if the design or descriptions were better. But I got much happier when I stopped bothering about that. The company works, the coders are happy (I hope so), and they give me a product I can really enjoy. And if I weren't lazy as a stone, I would create much more with it

EDIT: Wanted to add that even "professional" Beta tester for PS complain about ignorance and unfixed bugs since CS2(?).