One of the main aspects I am looking at when building my artifacts is automation. Automate as much as possible, but not more (my apologies to Einstein here). And automation requires conventions and standards, with as little edge-cases as possible. Here are my conventions, which I am using as rigorous as possible:
Every source file is encoded in UTF-8 using UNIX line terminators. Full stop. No exceptions.
So whenever you install an IDE or editor, first thing is to set the default file format!
Do not (as in never!) use tabs for indentation in any file. A tab is interpreted by the tool showing the file, e.g. an editor. Use spaces instead. A space is always just that, a space (and in a monotype font all characters have the same width). I use 4 spaces for indentation (2, 6, and 8 are also common, but for me 2 is not wide enough and anything larger than 4 is wasting precious real estate in my screen). Configure your IDE or editor for using spaces when typing a tab, easy to do.
Exception: if the context requires tabs, then of course use them One example are CSV files with tabulators as separators.
All figures are vector images, from source to use
Exception: when using images on websites I do convert them to PNG, a bitmap format
Use the same width with whatever height is required for images. This will scale all elements equally over all your figures! For instance, all your text in all your figures will have the same width and height!
Everything needs to be documented, as close to the source as possible
In the source files to understand what code is doing. As good as required to leave the project for six months, come back, read the documentation, and understand it again.
In generated documentation to explain that to others, e.g. in sites or stand-alone documents.
With meaningful online help for any tool, so everything should have a --help
switch with good information
Spell check everything, nothing is more embarrassing than spelling errors.
I know that, because there are still a lot of them in my work…
This also means to decide on what your write your text in. First, there is the question of language (English or German or Russian or whatever). Than there is the question of flavor. Take for instance UK spelling versus US spelling (and grammar). The publication location might restrict your choices (European projects prefer UK English, many of my conferences prefer US Spelling, etc.).
When naming an artifact, readability goes over convenience, always
Artifact is everything: a parameter or argument, a variable, a CLI switch, a function or method, a class or object, a file, a module or name space or sub-system, a project, a software package, a system or framework, you name it.
So do not use any meaningless abbreviations or acronyms
Use the naming right convention in the given context, for example
Java wants CamelCase wikipedia
bash
usually wants upper case for variables, some other mixed case (better lower case) for functions, no -
but _
to separate words.
And it is case sensitive!
Asciidoctor seems not to be case sensitive, but can take -
as separator.
Maven is XML-based and likes -
but by convention only lower case names.
Python does not like CamelCase neither -
LaTeX is very unusual (probably due to its age).
The characters backslash \
and @
are important here.
CamelCase is often used, no separators (suc has -
and _
) are allowed, names are mostly written in one stream of characters.
When using names, make sure that they either work in all required contexts or provide some translation means, for instance
A bash
script might call a variable SKB_BUILD_DATE
and translate it into skb-build-date
for Asciidoctor.
Be extra careful with upper and lower case names for files and directories and the like. Remember that different operating systems interpret them differently!
Be careful with special characters, such as #
or !
or ?
in file or directory names.
Yes, they might work, but might is usually not good enough.
Stick to letters, plus -
, _
, and .
.
Time and date are meaningless without convention and context. Especially time. It requires some idea about a time zone, probably DST, or location. Dates can also be tricky, with for instance different conventions to express a date in the US, the UK, and Central Europe. As a rule of thumb: always use ISO dates (yyy-mm-dd) and time (hh:mm:ss) with a UTC offset (not a time zone name!) or a location from the time zone database. See Wikipedia as general starting point on ISO 8601 and tz-db. You can also look at my research notes on time (my favorite past-time topic, look at the skb-web for details).
Use the right software or tool to solve a problem. Don’t be afraid to install and learn a new tool (if it is worth the effort). Don’t fall into the not-developed-here trap (I am talking from experience here, sadly).
Try to find open source software for doing a job, if possible and convenient. This allows others to re-use your work freely, investing their time but not necessarily their money. There is of course a large grey zone here, and more often than I like commercial tools are required. You’ll see in the tools list below that I am using quite a few commercial products, beside the large range of open source software.
When choosing open source software, make sure that they have a stable production version and a long shelf life.
Avoid any (as much as possible, so all the time) proprietary binary formats for the source of your work. Whatever can be written in a plain (UTF-8, see above) text file is best. There is a trade-off here, of course. For instance, when choosing Microsoft Powerpoint for slides (which I do use), then its own binary format is much more efficient than the also possible open XML format (and files are much smaller).
Exception: some software allows to use a standard (and standard here is important) compression on otherwise plain text files.
For instance, Inkscape can process .svg
plain text or .svgz
compressed format.
Since the compression is standard (here gzip
, see wikipedia), that’s not really a problem.
Archives in a standard format (for instance zip
or tar
or jar
) are also not a problem.
Update any software (frameworks, tools, products, plugins, etc.) you are using regularly. To a stable version of course. Then test the impacted artifacts of your work, thoroughly. This can be sometimes painful, involve larger than useful amount of work. For instance, Inkscape changed the encode of graphics from one minor version to another. This meant for me to re-do tons of figures, all manually (the automated translation provided was actually very good, but I did not fully trust it).
An update in software, and related work on your artifacts, is also a good chance to think stuff over, maybe look at things in a new way. So I see it always as an opportunity rather than a punishment.
When writing software (any software, really), help screens and error message are important. Important! Not necessarily for you (though see next bullet as well), but definitely for the people using your work.
Any help message should provide help beyond the obvious.
For instance a switch called --targets
will obviously set some targets (for a build or make system).
More important is (and required in the help):
what targets are available,
is the sequence given important,
do they have side-effects,
do they have dependencies,
are they expensive, etc.
Of course you’ll avoid a silly "an error occurred" error message. Instead, you will try to state what the detected problem is, where it was found (in the process or in a source file, a location as exact as possible), what your software did do about it (ignore, progress in a different branch, exit, etc.), how to fix it or avoid it later, and whatever other information is or might be useful. There is no harm in providing links to manuals or online information in error message, just make it convenient for a user.
Use https, everywhere, when providing links. There should be no plain http anymore. (Yes, I know that my own webserver doesn’t have a certificate, yet).
Eat your own dog food. Seriously. When offering software, then use it yourself first (at least you’ll have one user to start with). You’ll find bugs and missing features before everyone else.
Exception: it happens that one wants to explore something or learn or experiment. In that case, maybe using it is not so important. It’ll be good to state that in early documentation (early as in people see it early). For instance, when writing an experiment and publishing it on an open source site, state that this is an experiment. At least then people know, and everything else is their choice.
State the purpose and the intention of your artifacts as clearly as possible and as early as possible (for others to see). This will help in the long-run, you and everyone else. Also: it is better to do than to talk, especially in the open source context. So avoid to say I will (because you did not do yet) and focus on the I did (because you alrady did do it). And yes, I am not following this convention as I should…
Think in terms of reusing fragments (single, self-contained, no external dependencies, expressive artifacts) in many different contexts. When developing software using object-orientation, this is quite often used. But the same convention can be applied to for instance documentation and text. For instance, I do write some text in a single ADOC file (no links to other files and the like), mark is as a fragment (in a directory of the same name), and then import it in other documents. Don’t over do this, start large and separate later, but do it - it’ll safe you a lot of work.
On the same note: everything should have one (1!) normative source and duplications should be generated by a build or make process. This will avoid problems when forgetting to do the same changes to multiple sources (if that’s not automated itself, which means this convention is already applied).
Make sure that all your processes (create, change, build or make, run) are re-reproduceable on other systems.
This starts with another computer, other then the one you develop on. Other can of course be virtual.
Then do it on a different operating system or main operating system version.
You’ll be surprised how much configuration information is implicit (only on your systems) or very dependent (e.g. on the operating system or version).
Proving virtual images, for example containers, with your software running can help as well.
Leave almost nothing (as little as possible) for later. Done is done, and complete (and consistent) is better than any quantity. This is especially true for software features. It is much better to have all provided features complete (with documentation) than to offer tons of half-finished features. Yes, this convention is sometimes not easy to follow…
Test, test, test, then maybe test again. Test everything, many times. Including links (they tend to be broken all the time). Automate your testing, write test units or validation classes or functions or methods. For text and figures, testing means reading and editing and looking at them.
Test things individually (without context) and in units. For software, we tend to have small test cased and unit tests. For documentation artifacts, it is always good to for instance read headings and only headings, read paragraphs and only paragraphs, then only then read whole sections, chapters, or documents.