Repository navigation
[Observation] Complexities and clarities: sketches and user guides #1322
Replies: 5 comments 7 replies
|
@NorthHighlander101 thank you for writing this, and you're not nit-picking. You're right on both points: layerling keeps growing, and the guide has grown into long paragraphs that you have to read through to find one thing. Two things help right now: the search at the top of the guide finds a word across all chapters, and the ? at the top of a part's settings opens the guide right at that shape or tool. I'd gladly take you up on your offer. Could you pick the chapter that bothered you most and show here how you would lay it out? A rough outline of one or two sections is enough to see what you have in mind. As for the complexity: the basics (shapes, moving, grouping, holes) work just as before, and the new tools stay out of the way until you go looking for them. If there's a spot where something new did get in your way, tell me where. |
|
On 2026-11-05 14:26, Stefan wrote:
@NorthHighlander101 [1] thank you for writing this, and you're not
nit-picking. You're right on both points: layerling keeps growing, and
the guide has grown into long paragraphs that you have to read through
to find one thing.
Two things help right now: the search at the top of the guide finds a
word across all chapters, and the ? at the top of a part's settings
opens the guide right at that shape or tool.
I'd gladly take you up on your offer. Could you pick the chapter that
bothered you most and show here how you would lay it out? A rough
outline of one or two sections is enough to see what you have in mind.
As for the complexity: the basics (shapes, moving, grouping, holes)
work just as before, and the new tools stay out of the way until you
go looking for them. If there's a spot where something new did get in
your way, tell me where.
Hi Stefan
Thank you for your reply and for not taking offence at my comments,
after all the hard work you put into Layerling!
I have very quickly taken the user guide paragraph for sketches and put
together an example of the sort of thing I was meaning. It is very much
a quick draft for your review, it needs work in order to be publishable.
There needs to be some convensions on e.g. instruction colour and font
(I have italicised 'click' as an example of an action). Comments as a
result of an action being taken are shown in blue italic. Such are the
conventions I am referring to.
Note that I have used a serif font (good old Times Roman!) as IMHO it is
easier on the eye, but tat might be my age!
Please let me know what you think and if you want, I can take this
further for you.
Best regards
Tony Hagon
|
|
On 2026-11-05 14:26, Stefan wrote:
@NorthHighlander101 [1] thank you for writing this, and you're not
nit-picking. You're right on both points: layerling keeps growing, and
the guide has grown into long paragraphs that you have to read through
to find one thing.
Two things help right now: the search at the top of the guide finds a
word across all chapters, and the ? at the top of a part's settings
opens the guide right at that shape or tool.
As for the complexity: the basics (shapes, moving, grouping, holes)
work just as before, and the new tools stay out of the way until you
go looking for them. If there's a spot where something new did get in
your way, tell me where.
--
Hi again Stefan
Further to the example user guide I have just sent you, I am replying to
the above points:
Yes, the search facility has been very valuable - as long as I know what
I am searching for! That is my problem and lack of experience.
The query at each part setting is especially useful. But here is an
example of a difficulty I am having.
I do not want to put a comment on Github as I want to try to fathom it
out myself but I am having difficulty with sketches.
You may remember helping me by drawing the various radius curves on the
corner post for my carriage project. (Btw, your solution has worked fine
and I will send you images of the result in due course). Your
instruction is very clear but the difficult I have is understanding how
sketches work. I am trying to draw two sketches in order to carry out
the loft between them. But I don't understand how to draw a second
object on the same sketch, if that is the proper method. I guess I am
using my TurboCad experience and expecting the sketch workplane to
switch to 3D and to draw the second sketch in a difference in the Z
dimension. It was the Sketch User Guide that I was struggling with but I
will persevere!
Best regards
Tony Hagon
|
|
Firstly, here is the sample of my edit of part of the User Guide for your consideration... |
|
Draw a line, correct so far, but maybe we should add a hint, that layerline always snaps to the grid settings when you let go the shift key. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
I've been using Layerling for about a fortnight and with Stefan's help along the way. It has been revelatory compared to the other solid modelling packages I have tried and is a significant advance on them all.
May I make a couple of observations, please?
IMHO, Layerling is getting more and more features which is excellent. However, I am far from being a solid modelling expert. In my late 70s and wanting to use it for hobby purposes, this complexity is becoming bewildering. The various YouTube videos help a lot but I feel that Layerling is fast approaching the likes of Fusion and Blender whose learning curve is almost vertical and, for me, impossible to fathom to the point where I could not reasonably use them. Of course, I will probably be in the minority of Layerling users.
I turn to the excellent user guides but my main criticism is that, despite the fullness of the descriptions, the layouts of the guides make it difficult to find the information I am seeking if I don't read through sometimes many lines of words in a single paragraph.
Having written user guides, I know how much time it takes to write them. So, if I may offer my services to help restructure them, please let me know.....
I may be nit-picking but I feel that this is such a good package for the likes of me, it would be a shame that complexity and clarity fall by the wayside in the quest for ubiquity.
All reactions