Talk:Introduction to JP Boyd on Family Law

Introduction

I have written a brief introduction to this introduction. Also added a sentence or two to the existing copy in the following paragraph. I focus on JP rather than on the "team" because the great strength of this material is the feeling you get of his voice. See what you think.

You may need to rejig the entire intro section a bit, in my opinion. The very strong wikibook focus is fine online - not so relevant when you're staring at a PDF.

We would need to tell users where they can get the PDF and where to go online. Put it in a box. Bold.

Gayla Reid (talk) 16:26, 30 April 2013 (PDT)

Chapters headings doubling as section headings

I strongly recommend adding a sub-heading, Overview, to the start of each chapter (following the chapter's introduction).

Here is my thinking about this:

In the copy I'm editing, the chapter heading is also de facto the heading of the overview section. This is followed by "more detailed" sections. Logically this bothers me. It should be (a) heading; (b) section/section/section. (And in the in-print TOC it will need to look like this.)

The problem then becomes a style sheet headache, where each section (aka page) starts with an (a) heading, even though subsequent sections are actually (b) section headings. In an online non-book format, I'd take a heading page, put in the intro, then line up the sections for folks to link to: overview section/more detailed section/more detailed section. (The heading for the overview section could just say "overview."

Gayla Reid (talk) 16:26, 30 April 2013 (PDT)

Names of chapters and sections

Ideally, both for online and print, the names of the chapter and section headings should be exactly as it appears in any direction to it. Otherwise readers will start feeling anxious. (They know it's a minefield.)

For some chapters, there is a short title (in the TOC that you can see on the right when you have selected a chapter) and a longer title when you arrive at the destination. This creates uncertainty when you link internally (am I in the right place?)

Some links were using the short titles, but of course the longer title was showing up at the destinations. I changed this so that the link is the longer title - just to be consistent. (But in some cases (see comment on forms, below) I think the short title is the better one. Suggestions?

The "short" TOC

Right now the readers are looking at the short title in the brief TOC on the right but seeing a longer title in the link and at the destination. Consistency is important.

Gayla Reid (talk) 16:26, 30 April 2013 (PDT)

In-print TOC

We are having a nice numbered manual, right? It will help readers get around, given that they won't have hyperlinks. (I wouldn't want it online.)

Gayla Reid (talk) 16:26, 30 April 2013 (PDT)

Forms

The "short toc" has a name for the forms sections. When you get there it is something different - and it's very legalese. Something like: Supreme Court forms (family law). Can we get rid of those parentheses? (The short TOC for the forms is good, in my opinion.)

Gayla Reid (talk) 16:26, 30 April 2013 (PDT)

Creative commons

I added the rev. edition of the Creative Commons credit at the end of pages, but it has an ugly last line (darts out flush left). Gayla Reid (talk) 18:57, 30 April 2013 (PDT)

In law, (1) a written argument, or (2) a memorandum of law. A brief is usually presented to a judge as a summary of an argument or the law on a particular issue. Curiously, briefs are rarely brief.

In law, something that is relevant or important. A material fact, for example, is a fact relevant to a claim or a defence to a claim. See "claim," "evidence" and "fact."

In law, (1) a lawyer's advice to their client, (2) a lawyer's analysis of a legal problem, or (3) the views of an expert on an issue in an action. See "expert evidence" and "opinion evidence."

In law, a document demonstrating ownership of a thing. See "ownership."