Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
Search
Ideal Swich Model missing
|
--- In LTspice@..., "Lewis" <lineblp@...> wrote:
LTwiki.org <> is now fixed on the front page withHello Lewis, Some of the spammers were ferocious in their persistence, weren't they? They seemed to have had a perplexing, particular interest in the section on transformers. Never understood that. Perhaps they thought that name would attract a lot of visitors from non- techies searching for the fictitious type of "Transformer" (as in the films). Anyway, we have never really net-formally met. I believe I've seen one of your email addresses over at the LTwiki, so I will have to send you a message. By the way, I didn't have any trouble signing up - just took a very small amount of poking around to find the right page. I found it much more difficult to find the specialized wiki language help pages (most html also works at the wiki, by the way). Perhaps I will add a direct link to the wiki help as well. I don't think anyone needs to be a wiki language expert to start contributing to the LTwiki as an author may just describe what the appearance of their contribution should be and somebody else will probably add the wiki polish if the underlying piece is compelling. The most important thing is to write well, concise and clear. There is a built-in editing tool set for the most common commands (such as basic text formatting and the creation of hyperlinks), so the mechanics of contributing soon become easy enough. Perhaps we could set up a Help file replacement (many bits are already in place). Many sections would likely mimic LTspice's Help system and at least start out by heavily borrowing directly on the existing Help, so I wonder if permission from LTC would be required? If so, I think you be a more diplomatic choice than me to ask Mike. Regards -- analogspiceman |
|
martin562284
--- In LTspice@..., "analogspiceman" <analogspiceman@...> >
Well, people keeping complaining about Help, but so far no one,I posted a suggestion as to how we could collaborate on maintaining/improving the help document just a few days ago - Message no. 49532. |
|
--- In LTspice@..., "martin562284" <martin.sadler@...> wrote:
Hello, I think we will not have any chance to enhance the original help with tutorials. This help is intended to be a reference only. I am sure Mike will not change that. If we want a more tutorial like help, we would have to make our own with e. g. Wiki where many authors can contribute. Such a project should be preferably started from an existing tutorial to get a quicker start. Nevertheless, it will require somebody or a few to define the structure and to check the contents contributed by the many authors. Best regards, Helmut |
|
Lewis
This help idea sounds great. I drafted a request to 'Panama Mike' on this group, and copied that request to info@..., to copy and use scad3.pdf as a basis for a linkable, expanded help section. Nearly all of the work currently on the wiki can be linked to this help section, as well. If we get permission, I'll disassemble the help file into a section on the wiki that will serve as the stub. Hopefully others will then amplify and illustrate this help as appropriate. I'll let the group know when something is final on this request.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Any help link to assist others format their submissions would be appreciated! Your submissions, analogspiceman, are outstanding by anyone's measure... I found myself looking at your source code to see how you did some of that stuff! Best regards, Lewis --- In LTspice@..., "analogspiceman" <analogspiceman@...> wrote:
I found it much more difficult to find the specialized wiki |
|
Ganesan
I think keep the existing terse help in LTspice... Add web links
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
wherever necessary and clicking the web links will give examples, simulations and pictures, etc.. As new problems get solved they could be added under the appropriate heading.. Just a thought.. Cheers A. Ganesan On 9/17/2011 2:24 PM, Lewis wrote:
|
|
I agree with AG, because I hate bloated help files that take 10 mins just to find the correct syntax for a component.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
The existing help file is great just the way it is. It is accurate and complete, so don't mess it up, with a wordy probably inaccurate hot linked disaster. If a tool is required to introduce Spice to new users, then make it a completely separate tutorial, maybe with schematic / simulation screen shots. I'd suggest you try to see how other Beginner spice packages have tried to bridge the gap. TI-Tina has some tutorials, maybe the Pspice introductory tool can be modified to show LTspice methodology. -robert --- In LTspice@..., Ganesan <dg1@...> wrote:
|
|
--- In LTspice@..., Robert Talty wrote:
I agree with AG, because I hate bloated help files that take 10Robert, I also am very happy with Help as is. However, I am exploring how it might be improved because so many users seem unable to benefit effectively from Help and I want to see LTspice become as accessible as possible. It is accurate and complete, so don't mess it up, with a wordyAbove all, Help must remain a terse, effective reference of LTspice commands and how to use the unique features of the software package. That stated, Help fails to document many useful features of LTspice, contains unnecessarily inaccessible anachronistic language (e.g. "cards" and "decks" for starters), generally uses netlist notation and examples while yet the standard input is graphical via the schematic editor. This is very confusing for those (i.e., novices) who haven't developed an intuitive ability to correlate the two. If a tool is required to introduce Spice to new users, thenThe LTwiki might serve this purpose, or maybe if Mike or his minions actively solicited suggestions to improve Help it might be made to serve both purposes. Several obvious basic improvements come to mind and might go a long way to making Help everybody's friend: 1. Expunge all the confusing, inconsistent terminology such as "cards", "decks" and DOS style notations. 2. Provide at least one brief example of usage for each topic in Help. If these are not graphical, there should be a working hot link to either a graphical example or to launch an example schematic. 3. Even though Help defines LTspice specific terminology and syntax, every time and everywhere such terms are used such they should be hot linked back to their original definitions. 4. Index terms of the most common guesses made by newbies when searching Help for commands should be listed at the beginning of each separate Help topic. 5. Help is not complete. Too many useful, de facto "official" features actually are stable features of LTspice, yet are still undocumented. There is no good excuse for this. Personally, in spite of all of the above, I don't need any of the list improvements and quite satisfied with Help as is (anything missing that I feel a need for, I document in the wiki). Regards -- analogspiceman |
|
John Fields
On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 19:12:35 +0100, you wrote:
In message <j500ob+lpdp@...>, dated Fri, 16 Sep 2011,--- Indeed. But, in all fairness, earlier Microsoft stuff, like their 80XXX assembler, Qbasic compiler, and BASIC interpreter provided excellent documentation and, samples of code. --- In the case of LTspice, however, since the software's free, one can't (or shouldn't) expect the authors to jump at anyone's beck and call. -- JF |
to navigate to use esc to dismiss