[bisq-network/support] Decide on scope and style of use case articles (#352)

[Ken McCall]

Took me a couple of minutes to determine that the hyperlinks #1, #2, and #3 are not what you're referencing. 8-)

Here's information (any technical information) in a nutshell. There are 3 types of info (almost always):

- Concepts
- References
- Tasks

These should not be intermingled (described further on). 

_**https://bisq.wiki/Delete_and_resync_SPV_file**_ is a darn good write up. I'm impressed for someone who's not a professional writer (my assumption).

It's a Task, with the introductory paragraphs being Conceptual. That's OK. You've kept the Task and Concept separate (not intermingled). There are a number of things I would do to tighten it up both grammatically and technically, but that's what a Technical Writer/Editor does (my real job).

What I do is make changes, some of which are recommended, some are technical in nature and some are simply style issues. I'll do that in a separate topic.

The mechanics of how we do this I think we both need to decide upon. But before we go there, let's look at _**https://bisq.wiki/Delete_and_resync_SPV_file**_. It's a different animal. It is both Concept (the first 4 paragraphs) and Reference (most of the remainder). You're also exactly right in that it's verbose with a lot of "fluff" (perhaps unrelated info). 

_**https://bisq.wiki/Trading_fees**_ needs some work. It's striving to be a concept, but it's got other stuff intermingled. BTW some of it I recognize as things that have made me hesitate in making a Bisq transaction. But, we'll save that for later 8-).



-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/support/issues/352#issuecomment-602159182
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20200322/b25e87c4/attachment.html>