Hello everyone, An engaging discussion. Good idea, the only problem I see in it is that ROS is just too dynamic to be confined to a Handbook, and this is why probably we do not have enough tutorials for every topic/package. A Handbook which works good for the current 2-3 distributions (say, Indigo, Jade and K-turtle) will not be of much use later (around mid 2016) - so, we are looking at at least a new edition of the Handbook every 30 months. Though this can be somewhat avoided if the Handbook aims at 'using ROS' than 'exhaustively documenting ROS'. Metaphorically speaking - ROS is like running water, you can never step on the same water twice. I guess some Greek philosopher said that. All said and done, a hardbound volume on ROS from Springer with crisp pages will surely make it to my bookshelf (and clearly burn a hole in my pocket). :-) Regards, Arkapravo On 23 October 2014 20:52, Jack O'Quin wrote: > > On Oct 23, 2014 7:50 AM, "Rich Mattes" wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 4:27 AM, Dave Coleman > wrote: > >> > >> > but something that's badly needed from Clearpath's perspective is a > modern take on what the parts are which make up a typical ROS robot. > >> > >> Its unfortunate that creating better online ROS wiki documentation > isn't more prestigious or having any monetary reward as a book does, > because in this day and age that is what ROS, and most software projects, > really need. I've put a good amount of effort into editing the wiki but it > does get tiring. Perhaps having better author attribution on the ROS wiki's > conceptual pages would be more motivating. > >> > > > > Would it help to create a documentation SIG? Would there be enough > interest in one to keep it going? I'd imagine such a SIG could coordinate > to: > > > > * Explicitly document ROS conventions, providing references to REPs > where appropriate (base_link and map frames, coordinate systems, naming > schemes, etc.) > > * Transition useful conventions to REPs where appropriate > > * Identify common ROS use cases and create tutorials for them as Mike > suggested > > * Update existing tutorials when new ROS releases come out > > * Update existing tutorials to be more useful in general > > * Poke package maintainers and developers for {more,better,any} > documentation of their packages > > > > A lot of the above exists already scattered around the wiki, but I think > a concerted effort to tie it all together and fill in the blanks would be > beneficial. If there's interest, I can set up a mailing list, SIG wiki > page, and get things started. > > +1 > > _______________________________________________ > ros-users mailing list > ros-users@lists.ros.org > http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users > > -- *Arkapravo Bhaumik* http://about.me/arkapravo