Talk:Sync-Locked Tracks

in re. The Title
Ed 20Feb13: In general we have two types of pages in the manual: One deals with GUI interface items; The other deals with content which is not so much "what this button does" as it is "how to use the myriad of features exposed after this item is selected". It would seem reasonable to keep this distinction in mind both when creating a page title and creating the content on the page. In this case I think we are fighting this distinction and suffering with a page that is way too long because of it. I think we should consider splitting this material into at least two if not three separate pages; the first page's would be the landing page and its title would exactly reflect the GUI: "Sync-Lock Tracks"; the (only) second page might then have a title more along the lines of our recent Chains page: "Sync-Lock - …" (fill in the ellipsis with appropriate wording) Since this page will be "what it does" and maybe "how to use it" as well, I think this reinforces that its title should not be the name of the menu item, which is a command to turn the feature on and not the name of the feature. 
 * Gale 21Feb13: I agree it may be worth considering splitting the page into a landing page "what it does" and split-off pages "how to use it", but I think the first thing is to get the basics of "what it does" pinned down and decide how much detail is needed there. I suspect this is so complex for many users that a structure like this may be better:
 * A "what it does" summary, with a one-or-two-sentence description of features A, B, C....
 * feature A section with examples
 * feature B section with examples
 * feature C section with examples.
 * Wow, I need to sit down and think about this for a bit.  Certainly just documenting what the button & command do is trivial (and not helpful on its own).  Readers certainly need to get a good grasp of what SLTGroups are before they move on to understanding them.  I am minded to agree that what we need is a landing page that describes the button/command action (such as it is) and then talk about SLTG's what they are and how to select them.  I also think that the detailed usage of these is more tutorial in its nature and deserves to be placed on sub-page(s) where we can provide a lot more detail (the current images on the existing page are not entirely helpful as they are a bit simplistic. Then there is the question is it one tutorial on the use of Sync-Locking or several?  As with Chains ...  Do we however want to make the landing page "sufficient" for savvy users?  Let me think about all this a bit more.
 * Gale 22Feb13: I reread the "Sync-Locked Track Groups" section under the Intro and as it stands I think it reads well. The only problem is that if people come at it with preconceptions that if you select tracks then press Sync-Lock Tracks, those tracks are then members of a SLTG until you press the button again (or whatever), that misconception needs to be stated as incorrect very early on. I think this does show an expectation that you should click somehow on or at the side of the tracks to enrol them in a group, e.g. tracks 1, 3, 5 and 7 of 8, which is very clumsy with label tracks.  I could see a landing page plus a linked group of tutorials here like Recording Computer Playback. The current sections for Editing, Time Shift and Time Stretch would be separate pages. At least the Editing page would have a mini custom TOC with anchor links for each command or purpose. But it will be hard to make the landing page good enough without giving it its own image or images. I think it may need a Bill-like image with three groups separated by two label tracks, all numbered or highlighted somehow to define the terminology and show which tracks are affected and which not affected.
 * Peter 22Feb13: I'm thinking that you're probably right Gale that we may need an image with three SLTGs separated by two label tracks. Certainly, as stated in one of my notes below, I needed an Audacity project just like that to play with and develop my understanding the effects of sync-locking.  Simpler projects just did not provide enough detailed clarity.  I'm not sure that we need it to be "Bill-like" (but I'm open to persuasion).  On this landing page we could just show a "simple" example of just sliding say the centre SLTG of the three along the time-line - and linking out, of course, to sub-tutorial(s) - I think I'm liking the 3 separate sub-tutorials that you are suggesting above.
 * Gale22Feb13: Sliding is an edge case that shows Sync-Locked Track Groups working even when no tracks are selected or Sync-Lock Selected. I don't think we should use that example. A much better example may be something like deleting audio in front of a label and moving the labels back in the affected tracks.
 * Peter 22Feb13: From my own reading experience I didn't find the SLTG section clear enough to provide a full understanding. I can fully understand why some users come to this functionality with the preconception that you describe above (see my notes below) in the contents section re. the command name.
 * Gale22Feb13: Yes, but would it have been OK if there had been a note div that addressed your misconception? I'm not saying a rewrite is wrong, but that the initial text is sound in saying what the feature does. It just doesn't say what it doesn't do.
 * Peter 34Feb13: Yes that's a good idea Gale - so I'll plan to place a note saying what the command doesn't do to allay the preconceptions.

in re. The Content
Ed 6Jan13: We do not define the term "Sync-Locked Track Group" until over a third of the way down the page: "The label track defines a Sync-Locked Track Group." and, IMHO, that's a pretty poor definition. I fleshed it out a little bit further down but I feel that we should define the term here in this "intro".
 * Peter 20Feb13: Pro tem (until at least we settle on atitle for this page) I have added an H2 "Sync-Locked Track Groups" to the initial section to clarify what is in that section, i.e. it's defining a S-LTG. If we go with Gale's preferred page title "Sync-Locked Track Groups" then this new H2 will be redundant.  BTW Ed, the below text that you were commenting on says the label track "delimits a track group" not "defines ..." - are you happy with this?
 * Ed 20Feb13 : I care not about the distinction between "delimits" and "defines" here although personally I believe that "delimits" is more accurate. I do have a problem with having H2 ("Sync-Locked Track Groups") as the only section before we get into the examples, but I seem to be in the minority on that issue.
 * Gale: "Delimits" is better, but "separates" may be better still.
 * Peter: I think that whole section on SLTGroups needs a serious rewrite rather than a word-tweak here and there. Now that I think I have finally grasped the concept, having come to this from the POV of a naive user, I can try to find some time to work on an alternative, but it may not be for a few days.