in-program html help

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

in-program html help

ravas
We have the ability to make in-program help with html:
https://github.com/LibreCAD/LibreCAD/tree/master/librecad/support/doc

- Do we have any plans for how to structure this?
- How will it differ from the wiki?
- Is there any way we can reduce the double workload by some form of html <-to-> wiki conversion?

---

For people interested in helping:

http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qthelp-index.html
http://www.w3schools.com/html/default.asp
http://alternativeto.net/software/adobe-dreamweaver/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: in-program html help

ravas
What about making a separate github repository just for the html/css documentation?
It would group all the documentation commits; and we could structure it to double as a website.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: in-program html help

ravas
Maybe we could use the github project page feature:
https://help.github.com/categories/github-pages-basics/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: in-program html help

ravas
Github has an editor atom that runs on electron.
https://github.com/atom/atom

There is a useful plugin for html:
https://atom.io/packages/emmet
http://emmet.io/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: in-program html help

ravas
The more I think about documentation the less I support this system of integrated help.

What I propose is a brief description of each tool, which can be displayed via the
http://doc.qt.io/qt-4.8/qaction.html#whatsThis-prop
which is basically a more advanced tooltip.
Translating these will be the same as translating anything else in LibreCAD.
I don't know if the translation system even works with the help framework.
It seems messy and complicated...
and I would much rather work with restructuredText or markdown, as opposed to html.

Beyond the whatsThis description... I think we need three things:
- users manual (people seem to like this)
- tool reference (tool name, commands, hotkeys, icon, description, procedure)
- FAQ (for stuff like printing...)

It's been mentioned that we are moving to DokuWiki for a few reasons, one being easier translation.
If thats true, then it seems like the most efficient use of community effort would be to focus on those three articles;
and people can download them as PDF files if they want offline documentation.

Therefore, I propose that we drop the long unused help -> manual.
This will drop one required Qt framework, and possibly the SQL dependency... and we lose nothing.