Re: Web: Download: Add introductory text (issue 40510046)

[Graham Percival]

On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 01:23:51PM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
> Am 15.12.2013 06:47, schrieb Graham Percival:
> >2) they noticed the existing, read the "text input" page, but were
> >still confused.  Solution: improve the "text input" page.
> 
> I think the only issue with "text input" might be that it isn't
> explicit (or rather suggestive) enough about the editing
> environment.

Then it should be fixed.

> >Was it clear from the discussion on -user which of those problems
> >it was?
> 
> Not unambiguously clear. But it seems clear that we will have to
> take into account that people will proceed directly to the Download
> page without reading anything of the introduction or the Features
> page at most.

Hence the warning.

> >Maybe another whole page about "sample
> >usage", or something like that?
> 
> Maybe this should even be split: One dedicated page explaining the
> concept of IDEs, similar to the Text Input page but less elaborate,
> and another page that more or less lists available editors (i.e. the
> current "Easier editing" page with some modifications).

I like that idea.  So there would be 3 pages in Introduction:
- lilypond is text input
- text input means you write text
- list of available editors


> It was consensus that new users should actively be encouraged to
> download one of the complete environments, namely Frescobaldi or
> Denemo, which would then take care of installing LilyPond.

Is Frescobaldi available on OSX?  It's lacking the appropriate
symbol on the easier-editing page.
... apparently it's only available in macports.  That isn't
something that we should ask most users to try.

Denemo is not available on FreeBSD or OSX (accoring to the
symbols) so we can't recommend it without deliberately ignoring
some users.  Granted, anybody using freebsd will already know how
things work, but we shouldn't ignore OSX users, particularly since
many composers prefer OSX.

> I think the considerations about "chattiness" of texts or redundancy
> of information are suitable and necessary for the docs, but much
> less for the website.

I think that suitable chattiness is even *more* important for the
website.  Adding text is the easiest thing to do to docs, but can
often make users turn off their brains and not read stuff.  My
rule of thumb is that doubling the text results in half the number
of people reading it.

> The website doesn't have to be redundancy-free document with every
> information exactly once and in the right place (which it is far
> from currently BTW). It should rather be a comfortable place for
> potential new users who aren't already familiar with LilyPond or
> text based toolchains in general.

Right.  So let's direct new users to the best explanation we have
for how lilypond works.  Not a 3-sentence summary of the
situation.  Direct them to a whole page with images, examples,
screenshots, video screencasts, embedded youtube videos, etc.
If somebody is unfamiliar with text input, you cannot give a good
explanation in 3 sentences that they will understand.  You can't,
I can't, nobody can.  It's a whole different concept.

Sure, we could add 3 pages of material to the top of the download
page (and presumably the top of the Windows download page as
well).  But that would annoy experienced users.  Solution: use a
short notice to get newbies onto a dedicated page for them.

- Graham