Hello Steve,

Just uploaded a first review of the BG7002 and checked out the BG7204.

Since I do not have any experience in the LO Base, I have just made some superficial suggestions.

About your considerations:

i. There were some reference to bugs and a lot of pictures without caption.

ii. As far as I could tell, the features are pretty much the same for this chapter, didn't notice some significant change (I'm referring only to the GUI, can't say much for the code presented).


Are we planning to deliver the Base Guide still in 2021? Asking this because, if not I think we could use some second reviews on these documents.


Best regards,

Felipe Viggiano


Em 29/11/2021 08:20, Steve Fanning escreveu:

Hi Team,

During the past few days, I have spent some time looking at the 6.4 Base Guide as we begin to review and update it. Unfortunately, if we are to improve the quality of the book then the task may involve significantly more effort and time than we at first anticipated.

This conclusion has been drawn based on my work to date and is a result of the following main factors:

 * Previous emails have noted that the document would benefit from a
   refresh of the figures. What I hadn’t considered was that the “user
   data” within many of the figures is based on German examples, which
   isn’t ideal for an English language document. I have also found that
   the structure of the example “Media_without_Macros” database doesn’t
   quite match the figures in Chapter 3 (Tables). Hence there is
   additional effort needed to re-work some of the underlying sample
   databases to review their structure and include English data.
 * When reviewing the early sections of Chapter 3 (Tables), I was
   surprised by the level of change necessary to get the detail correct
   for 7.2. We can only assume that this is also the case in other
   chapters (maybe Felipe and Dev could comment on whether Chapters 1
   and 2 follow this trend).
 * I was a little shocked when I found out how many bugs are explicitly
   referenced in the text, with links to Bugzilla, and this feels like
   it could be a marketing disaster. Just to give an idea of the scope
   of this problem, I found specific references to the following bugs
   within the text 46180, 51452, 51453, 51959, 53027, 61871, 73707,
   80320, 82411, 82591, 87290. Also, statements like “Firebird engine
   is very good, it is its implementation in base which is full of
   bugs” and “The Report Builder is somewhat treacherous in use, as
   certain functions are available in theory but don’t work in
   practice” may be true but don’t create a great impression.
 * Discussion in the mailing list has indicated that we should update
   the technical content of the document in a few areas (e.g.,
   comparison of HSQLDB and Firebird; "Auto Grow" feature in reports;
   changes to Writer and maybe Calc may affect discussions of the
   interaction between Base and other LO components).
 * Previous authors and editors believed that the document should be
   re-structured (see for example
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Development/User_Guide_Tasks#Base_Guide).

I don’t think that all the above can be addressed quickly. Therefore, to make rapid progress (and complete the set of 7.2 guides), should we issue the 7.2 Base Guide simply as a cosmetic update to the 6.4 version? The ODT files have already been updated to the LO7 style and the 7.2 book covers are available. With no substantial change then there should be little reviewing required. However, I have already prepared an updated Preface and it might be worth including that.

Meanwhile we can continue reviewing/improving the material in preparation for a future update.

All views would be very welcome.

Regards,

Steve


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/documentation/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Reply via email to