Doc talk:2.4/Manual

提供: wiki
移動先: 案内検索

To Do List

Every author should visit Wiki Tasks to see what has to be done to the wiki in order to keep it up-to-date, especially with regard to upgrades and the impending 2.43 release. --Roger 00:18, 11 January 2007 (CET)

(User Note: There really needs to be a way to look up various Blender commands. For example, if I want to know what "Loc" does, I should be able to type it into a search or find an index of commands that explain what each one does. Speaking of which, inserting a search engine into these pages would be extremely helpful. If I've forgotten something or want to look up only one thing, it's tremendously time-consuming to pore through the entire manual.)

Exercises Section and wikibook

  • Maybe adding a "Exercises" section at the end of each part with the solution to themselves to show the using of the tools into a real project. Maybe, all exercises could be part of a "big" project... -- franzrogar 1 November 2005
  • Integrate the wikibook Blender 3D Noob to Pro as the mentioned exercises? -- franzrogar 1 November 2005


  1. Some sections are severely outdated (esp. with Version 2.4).
  2. There are a few errors in the documentation.
  3. Some sections are much too technically written.
  4. There is missing much information in some parts.

Will updated sections be flagged in the TOC? Is there a kind of review system? How does one make suggestions on error corrections and the like? --Soylentgreen 11:21, 2 November 2005 (CET)

After having read your User page, and see the wikibook you're helping in [Blender Dokumentation WikiBook], maybe you can update some parts of the Official Documentation with the updated info of that project and deprecate the WikiBook. -- franzrogar 2 November 2005
Well, I think we do have approx. twice as much text in some parts. I'm pretty sure that the WikiBooks project will merge sooner or later in the Mediawiki, but I don't know who to make the transition smooth and accepted.
Whom should I ask how to proceed? --Soylentgreen 22:31, 2 November 2005 (CET)
You can read it at Writer Guide. The bf-docboard must accept it first. It's a convenion. -- franzrogar 2 November 2005

Level of Subchapters

Some pages get very long. Shoudn't there be separate subpages? --Soylentgreen 11:21, 2 November 2005 (CET)

I agree with this opinion. Maybe we can split the doc like in Your First Animation in 30 + 30 Minutes. But it depends on what kind of info is stored in. -- franzrogar 2 November 2005 (Spain)
I have split the composition section and other pages up when I get the warning from wiki. I think we all should do this.--Roger 19:28, 27 November 2006 (CET)

Mixing two sections presents rightnow

Related both to Lattices:

  1. Mix the homeless document Modelling with Lattices with VIII BASIC DEFORMATIONS Lattice Animation, or
  2. Add the homeless document Modelling with lattices into XIII SPECIAL MODELLING TOOLS

-- franzrogar 2 November 2005 (Spain)

Uppercase headings

Some of the translations already have their manuals' headings with a capital, and the rest of the letters are lowercase (f.e. INTRODUCTION = Einleitung in .de). Should we make all translations like so? -- Sylph

Uppercase headings are extremly unusual in german and definitely don't look good. --Soylentgreen 22:26, 10 November 2005 (CET)

I wonder whether it looks better than normal text in any language... My point was, should all the headings be like, with one capital letter, and the rest lowercase. Sorry if I didn't make myself clear. --Sylph 10:41, 12 November 2005 (CET)

-I would prefer that, yes. --Soylentgreen 13:31, 12 November 2005 (CET)
-I second the motion. It's called Title Case in Microsoft Word. The Important Words are Capitalized, but Little Ones are Not.--Roger 00:53, 30 November 2006 (CET)
-I vote for one uppercase letter and the rest lowercase as well. Except for names directly taken from e.g the menus. --Hoehrer 16:10, 22 November 2006 (CET)

Chapter images/illustrations

Wouldn't it be cool to have the character-images from Carlos Gonzalez Morcillo's Yet One Way to Learn Blender in the various (matching) chapters of the blender-manual? Just a thought. --Hoehrer 21:35, 6 March 2006 (CET) Suzanne is the way go. simple, clean, and very sexy.--Roger 05:09, 19 November 2006 (CET)

Licensing of new pages? (issue resolved)

The copyright page linked to in the edit page is now filled in. So the issue is now resolved!

- Joeedh 05:20, 12 July 2006 (CEST)

Hi. For the new node editor pages I wrote for the reference section, I had to figure out how to deal with licensing issues. It would be nice if there was an official way for an author to explicitly put new pages under the manual's license. Myself, I added the following to the talk page of each page I wrote:

---start--- (wiki syntax preserved)

Copyright Notice (not really)

This document (Reference/Windows/Nodes/Composite_Nodes) can be licensed under either a) the license of the official Blender Foundation version of the Blender User Manuel, or b) under the Open Content Licsense. Which at the moment are one and the same.

This notice is to forstall potential copyright issues pertaining to printing the reference section. Since I don't believe printers will print a document with ambiguous licensing.

---end--- (ignore the "(not really)", that's just to make it clear in the menu that it's an example and not a real notice).

As you can see, it states that my pages are available for licensing under either whatever license the manual is using, or the Open Content License. This assumes that if the two ever differ, they will remain compatible, which seems a reasonable assumption to me.

The reason I worry about this, is that I think it's important that the manual's licensing remains clear for printing. It would be sad, if parts of the manual couldn't be printed because someone didn't license new pages then dropped off the face of the earth.

Of course, as far as I can tell, already-licensed pages that are edited or revised won't cause any problems, since they've already been licensed under Open Content.

-- Joeedh 06:08, 8 July 2006 (CEST)

I think it's pretty safe to say that, even though I started with the ref doco, the forum doco, a few tuts, and my own doodles, the H-Man and I have edited each and every Composite Node for the wiki User Manual, so the UM can be printed and copied. --Roger 05:13, 19 November 2006 (CET)

You can find orphaned pages at

General Manual Organization

Heuristics says we should have 7 +/- 2 topics before breaking it down further or rolling it up more. So, for the User Manual, we have too many topics right now. Can we try to keep the sequence and major topics organized around:

  1. Getting to know Blender = Intro, Navigating in 3d, scene mgt
  2. Models = Modelling, Modifiers
  3. Lighting
  4. Shading = Materials, Textures, Painting, Worlds & Backgrounds
  5. Animation = Basics, Characters, Advanced, Effects & Physical Sim
  6. Rendering = Rendering, Compositing, Video Seq Edit
  7. Beyond Blender = Extending Blender

Thanks. I might even go so far as to suggest these become 1st level headings in our book. PS-these also align with Pixar's organization and CG approach, which should make Blender that much more familiar with people crossing over from the dark side.

Manual Navigation - structure

The manual navigation system uses following convention:

Each TOC page (example has following links: -previous page (up and down) - links to the last page of the previous chapter. If it is the first TOC, links back to the main page of the manual. -next page (up and down) - links to the first page of the chapter -Contents - links to main page of the manual -Guidelines - links to Guidelines

Each page of each chapter links to previous and following page.

If the page is the first page of the chapter, its "previous" link leads to the TOC of the chapter.

If the page is the last page of the chapter, its "next" link leads to the TOC of the following chapter.

--BeBraw 12:37, 3 January 2007 (CET)