How far the hobby has fallen

... but the fact is that the language used was overblown and turgid, and often not helpful.

During the last 12 months and more I have spent some considerable time working in the Trainz Wiki editing some of that "overblown and turgid" language, as well as adding my own pages to the wiki (which others have edited to improve my occasionally "overblown and turgid" language - editing which I am grateful for).

One of the problems with technical documentation is that it is often (but not always) written by the "techies" who created the software/hardware in the first place. While these are obviously the best qualified people to understand the software/hardware and how it works etc, there is an old adage that I have always found to be useful and, more often than not, true - "Never let the programmers write the user documentation".

Obviously, my opinion only.
 
...

One of the problems with technical documentation is that it is often (but not always) written by the "techies" who created the software/hardware in the first place. While these are obviously the best qualified people to understand the software/hardware and how it works etc, there is an old adage that I have always found to be useful and, more often than not, true - "Never let the programmers write the user documentation.

That's because you need someone from a different perspective and software engineers are too close to the system. Ideally, we need a team effort. There have been, and probably still are, sections of the WiKi that are technical and not explained well. The technical description of the branches of the track-LOD-tree structure is a classic and N3V took the trouble to create a written tutorial.

I write my little tutorials to help CCS understand a particular process since nothing may have existed beforehand. I well remember struggling with this when I first started. One aspect that confused me was UV mapping and it was one of John's basic tutorials that lit the proverbial lightbulb. A Eureka moment. But I've learned a lot since then.

I like to investigate issues and, when I find something useful, I will pass it on.
 
Life sidetrack me away from Trainz. I also got back to building small N-scale switching layouts. My prefer railroading.
 
During the last 12 months and more I have spent some considerable time working in the Trainz Wiki editing some of that "overblown and turgid" language, as well as adding my own pages to the wiki (which others have edited to improve my occasionally "overblown and turgid" language - editing which I am grateful for).
The language I am referring to was not yours, but the banned wiki contributor. It is easily identifiable, such as this description of how to fix a faulty asset. "Select, and drag to highlight the lot using CTRL-X to Cut the errant text, with the intent to move the now defanged lines into the description container. Paste the moving Cut-buffer (lines) low down inside the description double-quotes, copy edit, Save, and retest." It's the sort of description that makes sense if you already know what it is trying to tell you, but is otherwise unintelligible.
 
No offence taken SailorDan. My comment was intended to rebuke the claim that the Wiki is outdated and out of touch. I agree with your description of some of the jargonated (is that a word?) "technobabble" that appears in a lot of Wikis - not just Trainz. It is easy to criticise the Trainz Wiki but have those critics made any contribution to it themselves?

The Trainz Wiki is what people make of it. With new versions of Trainz seemingly appearing more frequently it would be an impossible job for any one person to keep it fully up to date. I am trying to keep the pages I created up to date with the changes that have occurred between TRS19 and TRS19 SP1 and then there is Trainz Plus, which I do not have.

While a lot of the Wiki is user created and edited (that's an important part of being part of a community) N3V do contribute a lot of stuff but which would people prefer - staff spending their time updating and adding to the Wiki or fixing bugs and rolling out new features?
 
The "Trainz Wiki" link at the top of this page takes you to the main page. Links for content creation is on the left and also further down the page in the text.

Hmmm, seems like the official wiki has not been updated to link to https://contentcreation.trainzsimulator.com/


I'm NOT a big fan of using a wiki to replace a proper manual.

William

Old timer here would like some kind of a manual. When i started out on trains sims (MSTS) i payed about $25 for a manual. I would pay for something or someone to show the ins and outs for the sim.
 
Last edited:
MONEY is the key word. The cost of editing the confused WIKI will not be tolerated by the accountants. There is no tangible path from that cost/product to the bottom line. "If only we do this -------". prove a profit and you get the funding..... Unless an allocation is inserted into next year's plan - what you see is what you get.
 
Old timer here would like some kind of a manual. When i started out on trains sims (MSTS) i payed about $25 for a manual. I would pay for something or someone to show the ins and outs for the sim.

The first problem with printed manuals is the cost of printing and distribution. Who remembers when MS Word came on a set of 3.5" floppy disks (I forget how many there were but it was a lot) and a literal encyclopedic stack of thick books? That was the manual. Who could afford to do that today? With modern software if you want a printed manual you download the PDF documents from the distributors web site (or off the DVD) and you print them yourself.

The second problem is that with software a printed or PDF manual is out of date before it even leaves the printing presses - or appears on the web site. To write and edit a technical book and get all the necessary copyright issues sorted, and then send it to the publisher (for more editing and cutting) who then sends it on to the printer - takes at least 12-18 months (I have been there and done that lots of times with both printed and web based books). During that time several SPs would have been issued and perhaps a whole new version of the software has been released - so back to square one.

Wiki pages are not perfect but they are far easier to edit and keep up to date than printed documents or even PDF files.
 
One problem with the wiki is finding things.... nothing seems to be under the topic where I think I would find it. I've gotten best results from a google "site specific" search. For example, to find Environment settings enter this:
Code:
[URL="https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=environment+site:online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8"]environment site:online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/[/URL]
Tip - Bookmark this link and for future searches just replace TERM with what you are looking for:
Code:
[URL="https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=TERM+site:online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8"]TERM site:online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/[/URL]
 
One problem with the wiki is finding things.... nothing seems to be under the topic where I think I would find it. I've gotten best results from a google "site specific" search. For example, to find Environment settings enter this:
Code:
[URL="https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=environment+site:online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8"]environment site:online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/[/URL]
Tip - Bookmark this link and for future searches just replace TERM with what you are looking for:
Code:
[URL="https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=TERM+site:online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8"]TERM site:online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/[/URL]


Pretty much what I do as it's quicker!

Trouble with a printed manual is it takes ages to create and proof read and given the number of changes quickly becomes out of date.
 
Back
Top