Difference between revisions of "Talk:Introduction to JP Boyd on Family Law"
Gayla Reid (talk | contribs) m |
Gayla Reid (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
We would need to tell users where they can get the PDF and where to go online. Put it in a box. Bold. | We would need to tell users where they can get the PDF and where to go online. Put it in a box. Bold. | ||
==Structure== | |||
A few structural challenges: | A few structural challenges: | ||
| Line 11: | Line 12: | ||
1. '''Chapters headings doubling as section headings'''. | 1. '''Chapters headings doubling as section headings'''. | ||
I strongly recommend adding a sub-heading, Overview, to the start of each chapter (following the chapter's introduction). | I strongly recommend adding a sub-heading, '''Overview''', to the start of each chapter (following the chapter's introduction). | ||
Here is my thinking about this: | Here is my thinking about this: | ||
In the copy I'm editing, the chapter heading is also de facto the heading of the overview section. This is followed by "more detailed" sections. Logically this bothers me. It should be (a) heading; (b) section/section/section. And in the in-print TOC it will need to look like this. | In the copy I'm editing, the chapter heading is also de facto the heading of the overview section. This is followed by "more detailed" sections. Logically this bothers me. It should be (a) heading; (b) section/section/section. (And in the in-print TOC it will need to look like this.) | ||
The problem then becomes a style sheet headache, where each section (aka page) starts with an (a) heading, even though subsequent sections are actually (b) section headings. In an online non-book format, I'd take a heading page, put in the intro, then line up the sections for folks to link to: overview section/more detailed section/more detailed section. (The heading for the overview section could just say "overview." | The problem then becomes a style sheet headache, where each section (aka page) starts with an (a) heading, even though subsequent sections are actually (b) section headings. In an online non-book format, I'd take a heading page, put in the intro, then line up the sections for folks to link to: overview section/more detailed section/more detailed section. (The heading for the overview section could just say "overview." | ||
In the "long toc," which you see when you open initially,you can easily get the impression that there is nothing in that heading especially when you get something like "basic principles" as a section. | |||
2. '''Names of chapters'''. For some chapters, there is a short title (in the TOC that you can see on the right) and a longer title when you arrive at the destination. This creates uncertainty when you link internally (am I in the right place?) Ideally, both for online and print, the name of the chapter heading should be '''exactly''' as it appears in '''any''' direction to it. Otherwise readers will feeling anxious. Right now the readers are looking at the short title in the brief TOC on the right, but when the reader is being '''linked''' in the text the long title is used. It has to be consistent, not puzzling. (I don't care if long or short titles are used, but only one title would be a grand idea.) | 2. '''Names of chapters'''. For some chapters, there is a short title (in the TOC that you can see on the right when you have selected a chapter) and a longer title when you arrive at the destination. This creates uncertainty when you link internally (am I in the right place?) | ||
Ideally, both for online and print, the name of the chapter heading should be '''exactly''' as it appears in '''any''' direction to it. | |||
Otherwise readers will start feeling anxious. Right now the readers are looking at the short title in the brief TOC on the right, but when the reader is being '''linked''' in the text the long title is used. It has to be consistent, not puzzling. (I don't care if long or short titles are used, but only one title would be a grand idea.) | |||
| Line 27: | Line 33: | ||
4. The links to sections (and to forms) are sometimes different from the sections you can see on the short TOC. They are consistent when you get there. (This again is a short TOC issue rather than a linking issues.) | 4. The links to sections (and to forms) are sometimes different from the sections you can see on the short TOC. They are consistent when you get there. (This again is a short TOC issue rather than a linking issues.) | ||
[[User:Gayla Reid|Gayla Reid]] ([[User talk:Gayla Reid|talk]]) 16:26, 30 April 2013 (PDT) | |||
5. The "short toc" links to forms in a useful and clear way. But when you get to the forms they have that very legalese heading with parentheses: Supreme Court forms (family law) or words to that effect. Can we get rid of the (family law) format? | |||
Revision as of 23:26, 30 April 2013
I have written a brief introduction to this introduction. Also added a sentence or two to the existing copy in the following paragraph. I focus on JP rather than on the "team" because the great strength of this material is the feeling you get of his voice. See what you think.
You may need to rejig the entire intro section a bit, in my opinion. The very strong wikibook focus is fine online - not so relevant when you're staring at a PDF.
We would need to tell users where they can get the PDF and where to go online. Put it in a box. Bold.
Structure[edit]
A few structural challenges:
1. Chapters headings doubling as section headings.
I strongly recommend adding a sub-heading, Overview, to the start of each chapter (following the chapter's introduction).
Here is my thinking about this:
In the copy I'm editing, the chapter heading is also de facto the heading of the overview section. This is followed by "more detailed" sections. Logically this bothers me. It should be (a) heading; (b) section/section/section. (And in the in-print TOC it will need to look like this.)
The problem then becomes a style sheet headache, where each section (aka page) starts with an (a) heading, even though subsequent sections are actually (b) section headings. In an online non-book format, I'd take a heading page, put in the intro, then line up the sections for folks to link to: overview section/more detailed section/more detailed section. (The heading for the overview section could just say "overview."
In the "long toc," which you see when you open initially,you can easily get the impression that there is nothing in that heading especially when you get something like "basic principles" as a section.
2. Names of chapters. For some chapters, there is a short title (in the TOC that you can see on the right when you have selected a chapter) and a longer title when you arrive at the destination. This creates uncertainty when you link internally (am I in the right place?)
Ideally, both for online and print, the name of the chapter heading should be exactly as it appears in any direction to it.
Otherwise readers will start feeling anxious. Right now the readers are looking at the short title in the brief TOC on the right, but when the reader is being linked in the text the long title is used. It has to be consistent, not puzzling. (I don't care if long or short titles are used, but only one title would be a grand idea.)
3. In-print TOC. We are having a nice numbered manual, right?
4. The links to sections (and to forms) are sometimes different from the sections you can see on the short TOC. They are consistent when you get there. (This again is a short TOC issue rather than a linking issues.)
Gayla Reid (talk) 16:26, 30 April 2013 (PDT)
5. The "short toc" links to forms in a useful and clear way. But when you get to the forms they have that very legalese heading with parentheses: Supreme Court forms (family law) or words to that effect. Can we get rid of the (family law) format?