ReNamer: Making of new manual

narayan · 2009-03-29 10:14

Sorry I had never used such services.

I registered with MediaFire, and posted the zip file here:
http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=2769 … f6e8ebb871

(I hope I am doing this right! If not, please let me know what to do!)

Apart from the manuals, it also includes my suggestions to Denis. That will give the reviewers an idea of what may be added to the manual (if Denis agrees).

The reviewers would be able to answer some of the doubts, leaving that much less work for Denis.

BTW the page numbers in the suggestion files are for Denis (in continuation of our discussion). They are based on an earlier version of manual. Due to additional pages+splitting, the page numbers no longer match the current manual. But the topic would give an idea. If it does not ring a bell, please skip the point.

In the second half of the doc file, all points are new: They don't refer to page numbers, so you can check them out.

den4b · 2009-03-29 10:51

When I opened the link, it said: 0 items found to display!

I would say rapidshare.com would be a better free hosting, and it doesn't need any registration.

Alternatively, if you want I can upload this file on my site?

narayan · 2009-03-29 11:16

Does this link work?
http://www.mediafire.com/file/0gfuzyxynyz/Manuals.ip

den4b · 2009-03-29 13:57

Yes, this one works....

But files "Pascal Script Manual.pdf" and "User Manual.pdf" are identical, both are pascal script manuals

narayan · 2009-03-29 15:19

Oops! Corrected now!

Please check-
http://www.mediafire.com/file/mi2gijetjdz/Manuals.ip

narayan · 2009-04-04 02:10

Dear proofreaders,

If you have any feedback on-
(a) factual mistakes
(b) suggestions/comments on spellings/grammar/presentation

Please post them here!

krtek · 2009-04-04 12:34

I had just a glance on it. First thing I've noticed:

Renaming the files
When the button ReName is pressed, the following things happen:
1. The marked rules are applied to the marked files. Those files are renamed.
(page 16)

It is not true. When the ReName button is pressed rules are NOT applied to the marked files. If it was so, any of your manual adjustments (with F2 key) made after Preview would be lost.

Furthermore it is possible to rename files with ReNamer with no rules in rule window at all. You just press F2 on every file in files table and input the desired new name. And then you press Rename. No rules applied, but files are renamed. But if you press Preview instead of Rename you'll loose your manually edited filenames as rules (in this case no rules) will be applied to files and the "new name" column will be filled with the content of "name" column.

When ReName button is pressed files are renamed according to the path and new path columns in files table. And it is done in order as files appear in the files table, so changing of sort type in files table changes the order in which files will be renamed.

narayan · 2009-04-04 13:55

HI Konrad,

Manual renaming is described in a separate section. Its interaction with the rules is explained in detail.

krtek · 2009-04-04 15:57

It doesn't matter.
This sentence is wrong. It mislead the user and it stays in user mind.
From my point of view it is very important to make user aware of what's going on. Using half-truths is not the way you can do that. It has few drawbacks. It makes the manual muuuch longer, cause you need to explain every single possible variant. And it does not give user the basic knowledge that could be used for "debugging" his problems.
I think we should try to make user UNDERSTAND the process. This version of manual (at least at the first glance) lacks of the information about application philosophy, about how all this works. And (at least for me) that's vital. And it is only half page: preview (file-by-file according to rules) - rename (file-by-file according to files table).

I took a look at Manual renaming section.

Any activity in ReNamer GUI (such as adding/removing a file, adding/removing/editing a rule, pressing the Preview button, etc.) may reset the results of the manual renaming! This happens because manual renaming is not a rule; so its results cannot be passed on to the other rules for further processing. The rules always start with the file's original name.

Two half-truths in here (bolded).
1. It's not ANY activity. It's only Preview (and removing manually edited file from the files table, but I guess we don't need to write that: if user deletes the file from the files table it means he/she doesn't need its manually edited filename anymore). Yes, we should warn user that if AutoPreview is turned on, it may be performed on any change in the files table, any change in rules table and so on. But it is Preview that updates the new name column of the files table and nothing else.
Your version scares the user and warns it "just in case he/she has the AutoPreview on". Version above warns the user and makes him/her aware of the problem. In this version man who has AutoPreview off wan't be scared to add a file he/she forgot to add to the files table.

2. Only the first rule starts with the file's original filename. Otherwise the rules stacking won't have any sense.

And another two in here:

In addition to combining multiple rules, you can rename any file manually.
...
The newly edited name is shown as preview (the file is not renamed yet).
• You can abort the renaming by pressing ESC.

You can't rename files manualy. You can manually edit their new filenames.
And you can abort editing (not renaming) by pressing ESC.

Again, it seems to be the same, but it is not.
Word 'rename' can possibly make user think that if he/she press F2 and put the new name in the box and presses Enter the file will be renamed immediately.

ReNamer works with filenames and filepaths as strings (not files) from the beggining of the operation to the moment you press Rename button. And only then it works with files actually renaming them.
I know you feel that. Otherwise you would not write To actually rename the file after few lines.
I think you should separate theese two concepts with two words (eg. editing of the filename and renaming the file). Cause what we have got now may make a mess in users mind. What's the renaming if there is also some kind of actual renaming? Using such two 'concepts' (renaming and actual renaming) is a bit against the logic.

narayan · 2009-04-04 16:27

This indirect way of editing will get too painful, as we have to discuss each point. Direct editing would be much faster.

I posted pdf files because conversion to doc format was corrupting the manuscript too much.

But now I think even a corrupted doc file would serve the purpose: Apart from the corrected text, it will allow the proofreaders to insert their comments also, explaining the more accurate version (like what Konrad has done here).

What do you think?

den4b Forum

#51 2009-03-29 10:14

Re: ReNamer: Making of new manual

#52 2009-03-29 10:51

Re: ReNamer: Making of new manual

#53 2009-03-29 11:16

Re: ReNamer: Making of new manual

#54 2009-03-29 13:57

Re: ReNamer: Making of new manual

#55 2009-03-29 15:19

Re: ReNamer: Making of new manual

#56 2009-04-04 02:10

Re: ReNamer: Making of new manual

#57 2009-04-04 12:34

Re: ReNamer: Making of new manual

#58 2009-04-04 13:55

Re: ReNamer: Making of new manual

#59 2009-04-04 15:57

Re: ReNamer: Making of new manual

#60 2009-04-04 16:27

Re: ReNamer: Making of new manual

Board footer