Talk:Manual - Revision history

Pirx: /* Base Interface/ Computer Screens Discussion */

2005-03-18T15:48:46Z

‎Base Interface/ Computer Screens Discussion

2005-03-18T07:55:15Z

‎Base Interface/ Computer Screens Discussion

2005-03-17T12:50:31Z

‎Base Interface/ Computer Screens Discussion: manual:trading comment

2005-03-17T08:44:02Z

‎Tutorial discussion: tutorial seperation answer

2005-03-17T08:01:21Z

‎Base Interface/ Computer Screens Discussion: answered to sandbox mockup + added manual of style discussion

2005-03-17T00:54:18Z

‎Base Interface/ Computer Screens Discussion

2005-03-17T00:14:12Z

‎Tutorial discussion

2005-03-17T00:13:53Z

‎Tutorial discussion

2005-03-16T16:55:10Z

‎Base Interface/ Computer Screens Discussion: added my name

2005-03-16T16:52:11Z

‎Base Interface/ Computer Screens Discussion

@@ Line 78: / Line 78: @@
 ** [[User:pontiac|Pontiac]] ok, forget the first point. i've seen you moved the page already ;)
 ** [[User:Silverain|Silverain]] 23:55, 17 Mar 2005 (PST) CAPS are bad?  I presume some netiquette thing?  I was looking for some way to really have the links stand out from surrounding descriptions - but no problem will change to LC.  I can then move it the changed mockup to the main page so the links are there.
 = Manual style discussion =

@@ Line 77: / Line 77: @@
 * [[User:pontiac|Pontiac]] Looks good to me. Just two things: '''1.)''' The important one: What will happen to [[Manual:Trading]] and its content then? Do we leave it as is or incorporate the content into the cargo pages? '''2.)''' CAPITAL LETTERS ARE BAD i've learned ;) But that's just '''my''' opinion, and since i made this in the old wiki too i'm not ''fully'' against it. We can just leave it as in the mockup and sort that out '''if''' users complain ;)
 ** [[User:pontiac|Pontiac]] ok, forget the first point. i've seen you moved the page already ;)
 = Manual style discussion =

@@ Line 76: / Line 76: @@
 [[User:Silverain|Silverain]] 16:54, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) See an alternative layout of the Manual front page in the [[Sandbox]]
 * [[User:pontiac|Pontiac]] Looks good to me. Just two things: '''1.)''' The important one: What will happen to [[Manual:Trading]] and its content then? Do we leave it as is or incorporate the content into the cargo pages? '''2.)''' CAPITAL LETTERS ARE BAD i've learned ;) But that's just '''my''' opinion, and since i made this in the old wiki too i'm not ''fully'' against it. We can just leave it as in the mockup and sort that out '''if''' users complain ;)
 = Manual style discussion =

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:44, 17 March 2005
Line 90:		Line 90:
	*** Then again: '''It's a turorial, so having 'steps/pages/chapters' is quite fine''' ;)		*** Then again: '''It's a turorial, so having 'steps/pages/chapters' is quite fine''' ;)
	**** [[User:Silverain\|Silverain]] 16:13, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) Have uploaded the tutorials to the one page. Have a look. It seems to fit OK on the one page. Except for the first one, they are all fairly short.		**** [[User:Silverain\|Silverain]] 16:13, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) Have uploaded the tutorials to the one page. Have a look. It seems to fit OK on the one page. Except for the first one, they are all fairly short.
		+	***** [[User:pontiac\|Pontiac]] Looks fine to me :) But if you ''need'' to change it for the pdf version just go ahead.

@@ Line 75: / Line 75: @@
 * [[User:pontiac|pontiac]] 08:55, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) Ok, i think i have found a good middle way to go. What about using your structure (as you mentioned above and is pictured in the last example) in the manual mainpage, and also use the namespaces [Manual:Location:xxx] and [Manual:Computer:xxx] like in the examples. Then we have two seperate pages [Manual:Locations] and [Manual:Computer] that list the appropriate pages in them. That way we have both 'categories' at the same time.
 [[User:Silverain|Silverain]] 16:54, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) See an alternative layout of the Manual front page in the [[Sandbox]]
 = Tutorial discussion =

@@ Line 79: / Line 79: @@
 ** [[User:pontiac|pontiac]] 07:44, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) In the wiki i think i would prefer them on one page '''if they are short''' (<= A4). For longer ones i think leaving them as 5 pages is perect (something like <nowiki>[[Manual:Tutorial:Page1]] or [[Manual:Tutorial:Chapter1]]</nowiki> maybe?)
 *** Then again: '''It's a turorial, so having 'steps/pages/chapters' is quite fine''' ;)
-**** [[User:Silverain|Silverain]] [[User:Silverain|Silverain]] 16:13, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) Have uploaded the tutorials to the one page.  Have a look.  It seems to fit OK on the one page.  Except for the first one, they are all fairly short.
+**** [[User:Silverain|Silverain]] 16:13, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) Have uploaded the tutorials to the one page.  Have a look.  It seems to fit OK on the one page.  Except for the first one, they are all fairly short.

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:13, 17 March 2005
Line 79:		Line 79:
	** [[User:pontiac\|pontiac]] 07:44, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) In the wiki i think i would prefer them on one page '''if they are short''' (<= A4). For longer ones i think leaving them as 5 pages is perect (something like <nowiki>[[Manual:Tutorial:Page1]] or [[Manual:Tutorial:Chapter1]]</nowiki> maybe?)		** [[User:pontiac\|pontiac]] 07:44, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) In the wiki i think i would prefer them on one page '''if they are short''' (<= A4). For longer ones i think leaving them as 5 pages is perect (something like <nowiki>[[Manual:Tutorial:Page1]] or [[Manual:Tutorial:Chapter1]]</nowiki> maybe?)
	*** Then again: '''It's a turorial, so having 'steps/pages/chapters' is quite fine''' ;)		*** Then again: '''It's a turorial, so having 'steps/pages/chapters' is quite fine''' ;)
		+	**** [[User:Silverain\|Silverain]] [[User:Silverain\|Silverain]] 16:13, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) Have uploaded the tutorials to the one page. Have a look. It seems to fit OK on the one page. Except for the first one, they are all fairly short.

@@ Line 73: / Line 73: @@
 **** [[Manual:Computer:Ship dealer]]
 *** etc...
-* [[User:80.109.73.21|80.109.73.21]] 08:52, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) Ok, i think i have found a good middle way to go. What about using your structure (as you mentioned above and is pictured in the last example) in the manual mainpage, and also use the namespaces [Manual:Location:xxx] and [Manual:Computer:xxx] like in the examples. Then we have two seperate pages [Manual:Locations] and [Manual:Computer] that list the appropriate pages in them.
+* [[User:pontiac|pontiac]] 08:55, 16 Mar 2005 (PST) Ok, i think i have found a good middle way to go. What about using your structure (as you mentioned above and is pictured in the last example) in the manual mainpage, and also use the namespaces [Manual:Location:xxx] and [Manual:Computer:xxx] like in the examples. Then we have two seperate pages [Manual:Locations] and [Manual:Computer] that list the appropriate pages in them. That way we have both 'categories' at the same time.
 = Tutorial discussion =