Is the scripting wiki helpful to you?

NOW BACK TO BUSINESS...
Currently there are several things that are becomming apparent regarding the LsL Wiki:

* The general, basic format is confusing (compare it to the RPGstats Wiki if one does not believe this statement). The format needs simplified and cleaned up, with easy-to-follow, sensibly placed menus... menus that are minimalized to cover basic needs rather than presenting dozens of irrelevant, unrealted options in an arbitrary manner.

* The currnet syntax/definition lines do not meet the needs of newbies, early scripters, or even most professionals. They appeal to SOME techs; those techs are by far a very small minority (whether they want to admit that fact or not).

* Most everyone agrees the definitions need to be extensivly redone. "Third parameter in the function data set" does not a definition make.

* Currently being considered is adding a CONCEPT line directly following the "SYTNAX" line, to help further explain the use of the function.

* This would be followed by the already existing NEWBIE NOTES... a link to another page containing additional, detailed "early scripter" information written using standard English "tutoral" concepts. Those who cannot speak simple English or think that a major waste of their time: hands off.

* This would be followed by several basic one-line coding examples to show different cases of use.

Following these would be sections or links (as the indivdual case requires) to Caveats, Advance Examples, See Also.

Summary: the current Wiki IS confusing to the majority of the people who try to use it. Denying that does not alter the reality of that fact. So as Chaz recommended, either change and improve the format of the Wiki so it's easier to understand... or change the mission statement so people recognize it as a tech-for-techs work... and can put their time and effort into another endeavor.

The Wiki will either be THE resource for LsL... or it won't. I think Strife, after all these discussions, is starting to lean toward "it will". It's really not all that difficult a concept, and it is certainly not impossible if a few earnest people just decide to make it so.

Unless I've missed something on this thread, I think you'll find that Argent said this to you, Erin.

Otherwise, I'm quite prepared to accept the explanation both he and Jesse offered regarding the comment that irked me. As for my snarky response, the quip about the breakfast cereal was one of Argent's own, which I found very funny when he used it in a barney on another thread. Unfortunately, I am known for my capacity to make the odd off-colour remark myself.

As we all are from time to time. But Argent seems to enjoy making a habit of it.

And oops you're right. Got my messages mixed up (as did another user here who made the exact same mistake... I think message proximity maybe). I would be willing to accept their "explanation"... if it was from anyone other than Argent or Jesse. But Jesse's intentional trolling here and Argent's own posting MO leaves me to belive otherwise.

Argent has a long forum history of arguing just to be arguing and of believing that people who disagree with him are morons. That gets obnoxious fast. If he still believes that "all levels of scripters" has the same connotation as "all medical practitioners"... I surely need no more enlightenment from his direction. LOL

There's nothing that either Argent or Jesse has said here that wasn't discussed previously, thoroughly and repeatedly both in this and the parent thread that lead to this one. They're offering no suggestions for improving the Wiki (other than those already made by others), nothing original, and instead are trying to derail the efforts that even Strife himself is agreeing are logical and reasonable adjustments... suggestions that WILL benefit the Wiki if properly and regularly implemented. So yeah, Argent and I have nothing more to "discuss".

Take the bloody log out of your own eye first, Eren. What pissed me off in this thread is the message where I offered a reasoned response to you, and you cut it down to three lines... where I compared a piece of LSL syntax with PDP-11 Macro syntax... ignored every bit of explanatory content, and acted horribly insulted that I DARED to illustrate my point with an actual example.

Luckily nobody else seems to actually agree with you either, so your attempts to needlessly complicate the wiki by mixing up examples and descriptions in a horrible mess of hungarian notation will go nowhere.

Edit: I didn't reply to your last bait (below), so you decided to flame me in IM instead. That's real style.

Argent, this is total BS. And as you and I have both said... we have nothing more to discuss. The fact that you state no one else here agrees with me is just further example why I have absolutely no more time to spend on such argumentative nonsense. I'm not the first one who's told you you're offensive in these forums, and I doubt I will be the last.

This isn't discussion. This is getting hit in the head.

hey...

I fear, this constant "yes i do, no i don't" argumentation about trolling or not trolling is just a bit unproductive and keeps the willing people from following the essentials of this thread.

Maybe its time for a break now?
Take a deep breath, watch this video for leisure (I swear you will have fun!!!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_iOTBTyupc&annotation_id=annotation_98167&feature=iv

then come down to a carefull conclusion and finally put all your writing energy into enhancements of the wiki... I just start thinking about making a video tutorial about rotation, which i personally find the most complicated part in LSL scripting.

And now start flaming on me if you like...

But have fun,
Gaia

You're right, Gaia. Apologies for any part I had in this. I should know better than to even respond to such. Back to the task at hand.

Yes, that rotation thing is a head spinner for most people. It could be greatly simplified. A couple of simple one-line routines would make a world of difference for those trying to figure it out (such as a nice one that allows the concept of "degrees" to be plugged directly into rotation commands) .

(/me wonders where I stored that nice little routine...)

If what you mean is hand-made lists of related articles rather than using Categories, I tend to agree. The output of Categories is never as clearly oriented as well-design hand-made lists. Unfortunately, hand-made lists are harder to maintain. Hopefully, though, most of the functions, types, events, and etc. have already been defined, so maintenance isn't as difficult as when adding lots of new pages. We can continue to have Category-based lists, but replace the key ones with hand-made lists, like those in rpgstats.

I don't think this has been agreed as a concensus at all. How did you determine the proportion? There are good reasons that this format is an industry standard. Documents that don't follow it tend to be bad documents. Please point me to a good counterexample.

Newbie notes should be further down the page, not right near the top. A LINK to newbie notes at the top would be fine.

Stating it doesn't make it a fact. It's confusing to some, that's clear. IMHO, the best response to those some is to educate them a little.

I've stated prior that Newbie Notes should be an entirely separate page, with a link to that page from the main.



Denying the obvious isn't factual either Lear. It's apparent from posts on this thread, throughout the forums and on JIRA than more than "some" are confused by the current Wiki layout. What do you expect at this point, a statistical analysis?



AN industry standard being the key here. It's not the only industry standard (for good reason) nor imo, is it the best. That of course, is a matter of opinion, but from what I've seen that opinion line is largely drawn and divided between deep techs and users. -- and even some of the techs don't like it.

As has already been pointed out, repeatedly, it's not just newbies that are confused by the current Wiki; expert, experienced programmers are confused as well. To be truthful, we're repeatedly seeing the "yes it is/no it isn't" and "where do you get that- prove it" mentality, so you'll excuse me if I decline to reply to further such. If you don't agree with my views, that's fine. Your privilege. I understand and respect your opinion. But people have been legitimately griping about the Wiki for quite some time, and no one has done much about that fact. So... cooperative and progressive-- or rigidly immovable-- that's always a choice.

If I may... the syntax issue has been pretty much settled by now so... ???
Strife and I have agreed that keeping the current syntax followed by a newbie-oriented "concept" line would serve the needs of the marjority of users. Beyond that... I don't really feel a personal need to still debate it.

You said, "* The current syntax/definition lines do not meet the needs of newbies, early scripters, or even most professionals." You completely made that up. It's not borne out by this thread or Jira entries or anythying else. I'm not denying any facts. I'm disagreeing with your opinion, and your stating it like it's an obvious fact.

Show me a good example.

Like whom? Any expert, experienced programmer who doesn't understand a prototype in the form of the language itself is neither of the above.

People would be griping about it no matter HOW it was written, because it's the *subject* that's difficult. It's easy to point the finger at the document.
I'm confident that we'll find this "Concept" line poorly defined, arbitrary, and more confusing.

Even if you're right (and frankly, the negative attitude sux)... what skin is it off your nose? If it helps others, you can just go ahead and ignore that line. Is that ok with you?

I think that if you know Strife at all, you should feel pretty confident that he's going to have a strong hand in what goes into that line. If you want to accuse Strife of being "poorly defined, arbitrary and more confusing"... be my guest.

As I said Lear, I have no desire to debate this with you further. I've dealt with hard-core techs my entire career and have learned to recognize when it's fruitless to discuss a matter further. Your personal opinions and attitude are pretty much established; the LsLWiki is being revised regardless.

There you go being arrogant and condescending again.

I'm sure Strife will struggle with the ill-defined "Concept" line, and I'm sure it will cause confusion, and since I spend a lot of time explaining scripting to people, it'll just add to that burden.

I don't have a negative attitude. I just don't agree with bad ideas. You obviously don't know me well, so don't go making generalizations.

I've dealt with inaccurate, fuzzy thinking, pompous asses all my life, and I realize when it's fruitless to continue, so I'm done here too. Your personal opinions are pretty much established.

BTW, folks who know me have seen me make concessions against interests and actually change my opinion in these forums, actually *learning* from other posters. It's fun, you should try it.

No Lear, I was RESPONDING to a post that was arrogant and condescending. If you got back a little of your own attitude and don't like it-- then be more respectful next time.



Ditto dude.




I'm sure you have.

Note that my previous posts all remarked on the ideas presented and not on the person presenting them. But you're right, I shouldn't have let myself sink to your level.

My question Lear is why you felt it necessary to sink to any level rather than just present your opinions. I didn't insult you. I didn't get personal with you. All I did was state my opinions about the Wiki.

Now if you don't like those opinions, that's your privilege. It is not your privilege to harass me just because you don't like my ideas. Your personal disagreement with what I present does not give you the right to be abusive.

Even when Strife admits that a concept line might be a good addition to the Wiki... you still continue to insist you're right? That I'm wrong, my ideas are bad, and that Strife will probably implement the idea poorly?
Then you have the gall to call me a "pompous ass"?

What exactly have you contributed to this process besides echoing thoughts already expressed by other people? My experience Lear: the people who start applying the lables are those who feel they can't win the "argument" any other way.

If you can't discuss rationally, if you have to resort to such tactics to try to somehow prove your point (how that happens is beyond me)... then I have no need for your alternatives. I'll just let the moderators deal with you. Bye.

...and a tiny voice piped up from the bottom of the mountain and said "Please try to work toward essential discussion and away from personal attack. Thanks, and I hope it's a great weekend for all!"

You too Teeple. In truth, I think any benefit from this discussion has long since passed.

Strife has made his decisions, I'm assisting him with them at this time, as are others. Decisions are still being made and people are actually starting to work on the project. There's really no benefit or need for me to "debate" these things further here. The thread wasn't necessary to begin with and hasn't really offered anything to the intial discussion.

This thread was originally started as a half-joking effort by Chaz in response to tech-claims that the LsL Wiki is fine just the way it is and that most people are happy with it. I think the proof to the contrary was pretty much established after 3 days of "voting". If I were to present a professional survey, I would very much expect the "dissatisfied with the Wiki" would be a landslide. Strife has come to recognize this as fact and is taking steps to rectify that. As he said, he probably should have done so a couple years ago when these issues first came up. So the Wiki is being updated, progress is being made, and for me at least... this thread is dead.