odoo/documentation#2854

Created by fw-bot

label

odoo-dev:16.0-15.0-inventory-thd-batch-updates-zst-fTmk-fw

head

dd60e076dd6d7b38870c96061d05a5042ca46dce

merged

3 years ago by Sales, Antoine Vandevenne (anv)

	odoo/documentation
15.0	#2556
saas-15.2	#2852
saas-15.3	#2853
16.0	#2854
17.0
18.0
saas-18.2
saas-18.3
saas-18.4
19.0
master	#2855

[FW][IMP] inventory: thd batch updates

Overview

This is a batch cherry pick of PR’s #2002, #1984, #1900, #1876, #1870, #1854, and #1824
I took the changes originally proposed in these PR’s and stacked them here on a fresh 15.0 base since they were all merge requests into 15.0.

Formatting updates

On top of the original changes proposed by @thomasdeleval, I went ahead and updated technicals for each affected RST file + associated images. Those changes are as follows in order to bring each doc up to standards:

• fixed 100th character line breaks
• added alt text to images with proper grammar
• fixed indentations on RST tags
• renamed images attached to respective RST files (when appropriate) to match new convention (usage_01.png —> uom-handling-vs-purchase.png), and updated RST links accordingly.
• fixed some broken links + misnamed folders

Follow up items for review

I did not change any of the content other than what what the PRs originally suggested, however I think there are a number of improvements to be made around wording, grammar, and specificity of language.

Generally speaking, please consider the following suggestions in content review stage:

• add missing :guilabel:'s 😈
• wording/grammar: I caught a number of instances where the technical details were too wordy, vague, or the instruction got lost / wasn’t clear. Some words are strange like “hit” instead of “click” or “choose”.
• headings: especially the h1 so they follow convention re:guidelines:headings
• Consider rephrasing all hypothetical narratives (e.g. “imagine if…”). Would stick to third-person instructional w/ time order language, if possible. “What if” scenarios are more helpful when visually illustrated with video or long-form blog articles, however for software documentation, this will interrupt ability to skim and absorb instructions which are supposed to be clear and easy to find.
• Similarly, would also reword/remove all first-person and second-person familiar statements and stick with third-person instructional.
• images: check all for HD resolution, at or around 768 pixel breakpoint in width, and are compressed. Are there any images that need to be reshot?
• images: are they actually showcasing the feature being written about? Some aren’t clear.
• remove unnecessary images, or surround them with new blocks of descriptive copy so the writing is leading the document instead of the visuals re: guidlines:images

Forward-Port-Of: #2556