Reorganisation of the Rulebook chapters

Comments about this discussion:

Started 27 Dec 15:31

Based on Klaas comment about seperating jumps I start this discussion as we need it anyway. 2 years ago we already start to reorganise the rulebook into more logic chapters and we want to continue / finish this process this time. The target is to have every discipline seperate to be able to print out rules for a discipline without printing the complete book. Also a rider should find the rules for one discipline as easy and clear as possible while dont getting confused by additional rules for the host.

Klaas comment that jumps fits to the group of disciplines named as Urban which are Flat and Street and maybe Trials. I agree to his comment and we should discuss how it would be good to finaly organise the rulebook. The Head groups should be based on tyically groups of diciplines which are:

Track Race: 100m, 400m, 800m, One Foot, Wheel Walk, and IUF Slalom, 4x100 Relay, Track Coasting, Track Gliding, (already have its own chapter)
Road Race: 10K, 42K, 100k (already have its own chapter)Muni: Downhill, Uphill, Cross Country, maybe Slope Style (already have its own chapter)
Urban: Street, Flatland, Trial, Jumps
Team: Basketball, Hockey
Freestyle: Individual, Pairs, Group, Std Skill, X-Style

So we are not that far away from a well sorted rulebook. Chapter 2 has to be cleaned (jumps seems to move already), there are some disciplines inside that are optional and not happen on a track or usually never happen at any competition since years. Maybe some of them could be deleted completely from the rulebook. Every host is free to add some new / old optional or fun disciplines to his event so why have some very view of them in the rulebook like giraffe backwards or juggling race...
Also the Street and FLat chapter should be seperated, now it is one long chapter. Maybe all the stuff about selecting judges, which is mostly copy and paste from Freestyle could be moved into chapter 1 toghether with the same part from Freestyle as a part abotu how to select judges as this is host related stuff, not rider related. So Freestyle would be shorter and Flat and Street can be easy seperated into 2 sections.

As a result, a host find all information he need in chapter 1 and a rider find his related stuff in a single chapter about his discipline and all disciplines are grouped then in a way that make sense and fit to those days event structure-

Comment 30 Dec 15:15

Mary Koehler and I (Steve Koehler) are very interested in the aspect separating host and competitor rules.  This would be quickest to accomplish by making sure that each event section is separated this way. 

In the future, we could consider having separate competitor and host rulebooks, if that seemed desirable.  However, keeping the two sections together makes some sense, because a competitor should have some idea of the constraints the host is working under, and the hosts should know what the competitors are up to, in order to run the event properly.

With this in mind, someone doing a lot of work in a section of the rulebook should consider splitting host and competitor rules.  I would be happy to do some rewriting, myself, but I would like to rewrite a section that is not undergoing large changes.  If someone has a suggestion for a section to tackle, please let me know.  Otherwise, I will start with a section that seems very confused, and work first on that one.

Comment 30 Dec 15:25

I am in favor of separating host and competitor rules. Currently, a competitor has to read through a lot of organizing crap in order to know the rules they need to compete. Most of them don't do this. By shorting the rules for them, it increases the likelihood that they'll read the rules. Also, it makes it much easier to translate the rulebook as really only the competitor rules need to be translated for the most part. The competitors are naturally always allowed to read the organizing rulebook if they desire. The host rulebook could then also become the place for the Event Handbook that has been discussed many times but never really created.

Precisely how to split the rulebooks would certainly be tricky and there are a lot of issues to be discussed.

I think that I will likely be one of the main rulebook editors again and splitting the rulebook is a goal of mine in that process.

Steve, let's talk about a section to tackle.

Comment 30 Dec 15:53

For sure it is a lot of work as all chapters has to be checkd deep and detailed to find all points that has to be moved. I guess it would be good to see a section prepared by Scott and Steve. 

As the main job can only be done when the rulebook is closed, this discussion should end in a proposal that give an Editor group leaded by Scott green light to reorganize the rulebook in the right way. So a sample section could be a good way or at least a clear definition of the new structure.

Comment 30 Dec 16:30

All of this sounds good to me. 

Comment 31 Dec 01:03

Me too. It would accomplish many good things, the main one being an easier way for people to find the information they need, without having to wade through a bunch of material they don't need. If people see the final version of this, they might start actually reading our Rulebook!  (Most don't).

Olaf's breakdown of sections makes sense to me. However the Freestyle section should not be called Freestyle, as that is only a subset of that section. Standard Skill and X-Style are *not* Freestyle and it would be confusing. The old word we used was Artistic. I'd like to hear from Gossi on what he thinks would be a good label for that section, as I'm not that keen on Artistic either.

However I don't think I am in favor of "to have every discipline separate to be able to print out rules for a discipline without printing the complete book." At least not in terms of "micro-printing", where the officials in charge of a given event are given a partial set of rules, and then go on to run the event with mistakes because they don't have enough information. For example, Gliding rules are based on Track & Field rules. If the officials are only in possession of the Gliding section without all the necessary and relevant parts of the Track & Field section, we are going to have problems.

In a perfect world, all officials will have much time to plan ahead, and know what events they will be running. They will have plenty of time to study all the relevant rules without distraction (and with plenty of sleep) and will be fully experts by competition time. But as of Unicon XVII, we still have well-meaning, hard-working volunteers that have not been provided with enough information to properly run their events, and problems ensue. So my point is that each event cannot usefully have a "complete" set of rules unto itself, without having a lot of repetition throughout the book.

Our objective should be to not repeat the same information if it can be avoided. When we do this, it can lead to problems in future edits. We've experienced this in the past, and are still correcting some of the "remainders" from our splitting the book into chapters. Each chapter *should* contain all the information needed to conduct the events within it, but will need to be accompanied by the relevant parts of the "main" chapter for any general rules that also apply to that chapter.

But we can do that. And we can also separate out host content from rider content. If we think of the book's main form being electronic, all the information should be easily available if one has an Internet connection. We can work out the paper version(s) from there. Our current General Rules section already does a little of this where it explains some responsibilities of hosts, and other responsibilities of participants.

The goal of the rider-oriented content should be to provide only the information a competitor needs to compete with all the necessary knowledge, and nothing else. Many events would probably benefit from a very short synopsis of what the event is supposed to be, followed by the details. Beyond that, any rider that wants to learn more can refer to the host sections. Possibly in the future we could also contain philosophy and history content, explaining how the events came to be, and why we do them as we do.

I hope to be able to help on this project. Work on it could start now, to figure out the basic format and structure. The details would, of course, have to wait until all of these proposals are finished.

Comment 08 Jan 06:57

I like the proposal but would like to make a remark regarding hockey:
The section about hockey is already focused on "competitor rules".
There are hardly any rules or recommendations for the host how to run a
tournament. Therefore, IMHO, I don't think it is necessary to reorganize
anything in the hockey section. However, when you start your work and
plan to change something in the hockey part, could you please keep me up
to date?

Comment 08 Jan 07:04

I will vote Agree for the proposal, provided that the Host rules are also 'easily' accessible to regular participants would they desire to read them. I wouldn't want anyone to get the feeling that there is a secret rulebook.

Comment 08 Jan 07:17

@Rolf - yes, some sections are already very independent and maybe need not one change. In case a change / addition is needed, the committee directors will be contacted to discuss it and if needed the discipline committee have to go for a voting. We don't want to change the rules, just reaorganize them where we see a need.

@Klaas - Everybody will be able to download / print the full rulebook like before. Nothing will be hidden / secret. It is just additional possible then to just print out competition rules / host rules / only rules for one discipline... We already sort out a lot of confusion last time. Flatland for example was 2010 spreaded over 17 places in the rulebook, placed in different chapters, now its much more compact but you still find there the rules how to select judges which is not very interesting for a rider. He can read it if he like but he must not and I have the feeling that some start reading and already stop before the "real" rules begin. Also a Host has to hunt for some Details actually. 

Comment 12 Jan 18:07

I notice the "proposal" is up for review. The proposal lacks any detail, so there's not much to argue about in it.  :-)

I would just add that we can always benefit from the help of non-native English speakers with a sense of organization, and to make sure nothing the "natives" do doesn't read well for the rest of the world.

Comment 26 Jan 07:24

Comment 26 Jan 16:45

Wow Mary and Steve, what a well-thought out structure! I like your grouping in a) b) c) and d). It shows that there is more than the distinction between competitor rules and host rules, which the discussion until now was about.

I haven't read every word of the example chapter, but enough to see what goes where, and I like it very much.

The one thing I would suggest is that perhaps throughout a chapter, it is clear in which section you are. Would it be an idea to do this through an extra level in the section numbers, like:

3.1 Overview
  3.1.1 Definition
  3.1.2 Rider Summary
3.2 Competitor Rules
  3.2.1 Safety
  3.2.2 Unicycles
  3.2.3 Rider Identification
  3.2.4 Protests
  3.2.5 Event Flow
3.3 Judges and Officials Rules
  3.3.1 Race Director
  3.3.2 Referee
3.4 Event Organizer Rules
  3.4.1 Venue
(etc)

Most of the readers of the rulebook are competitors, and they will quickly learn that they only "have to" read sections x.1 and x.2. At each section header, you see from the number where you are. Otherwise you get lost quickly (the group headers appear just once), and a competitor may end up scrutinising the judges section.

Once again, a good approach and very well worked-out! The structure is much clearer, and we still have a single document to maintain. It will be a lot of work though to reorganise all the chapters consistently.

Comment 26 Jan 17:12

Klaas, from a software point of view, what you're suggesting is a big pain and really doesn't end up looking as good as you might think. (This was something I helped Mary and Steve test.)

What do you think about something like:

3a Overview
  3a.1 Definition
  3a.2 Rider Summary
3b Competitor Rules
  3b.1 Safety
  3b.2 Unicycles
  ...

Also, on the header of each page, it shows what subchapter you are in. (Although this could certainly be improved to be more clear.)

Comment 26 Jan 17:20

Scott, even disregarding the software technicalities your proposal looks even better to me. I just thought that a system of only numbers would be easier to implement than a mixed number/letter scheme.

The page headers would help too. They were not in the example pdf.

Comment 26 Jan 17:37

The mixed letter scheme is actually easier to implement in this case and I can try to work up an example of this in the next few days.

The headers are in fact there, but not on the pages where the subchapter is started. The reason the software does this is because it thinks you see the big heading for the new subchapter on that page already, therefore the header is not need (notice the difference between heading and header here). If we want headers on every page, I can see if this is also possible.

Comment 26 Jan 17:43

That was easier than I thought. Here is the test chapter with the numbering as suggested by Klaas:

http://unicycling.org/files/iuf-rulebook-2015-reorganization-part-3-2.pdf

I'm not sure that I like it. It looks odd. Other opinions?

Comment 26 Jan 17:47

I'm in favour of the mixed scheme already, and wouldn't need an example to get convinced. Not only are the headers clearer with a letter in them, they are also more consistent with the headings which have the letter already.

I see the headers now. I didn't go down enough pages to see one. I would like to have them on every page, then you have a single and reliable place to look for for a 'road sign'. On the first two pages, the header could read "(Part) 3 Road Racing", although it could be omitted on the very first page.

Comment 26 Jan 17:55

(My previous comment was largely written before you posted your example.)

Having seen it now, I think indeed it probably looks more odd than an all-number scheme, but I still think it is clearer. And hey, are we unicyclists afraid of oddity, especially if it serves a purpose?

Comment 26 Jan 21:30

Congratulations on this idea of how to break it down! It's simple, organized, and will even lead to better improvements to the rules themselves. This setup will allow for more information to be added into the Officials and Hosts sections; the stuff that's never been in there before but what those people really need.

The only bad thing is all the bulk. But this isn't a problem either. If you're reading the rulebook in HTML 5, for instance, you can have expandable sections, and not click on the Officials and Hosts stuff unless you want to see it. But it's always there if you need it. For paper versions, the easiest solution is to leave out the sections you don't need. A "rider" version of the rulebook would use a lot less paper, be more portable and cheaper to print.

Comment 26 Jan 22:40

I don't like the mixed number and letter scheme. I think it looks weird. I also think that with the headers on each page it is clear which section you are in. It is easier to read the name of the section at the top of the page than to see a letter like 'b' and remember what it is associated with.

John, it actually doesn't create more bulk and in some chapters it actually condenses things. Mary and I started working on the Freestyle chapter last week and found it made things more simplified and we were able to remove some redundant text. I'm glad that you agree that where there might be more bulk, the pros of the new system outweigh the cons.

Comment 27 Jan 10:08

I am not sure I like the mixed number and letter scheme. It looks cluttered. But, I agree with Bil, that it would be nice to have headers on every page, even those where the heading is present. Also, Scott or Steve, can the header be expanded to reference the chapter? For example, "Road Racing: Competitor Rules", or something like that.

Also, I just re-read this whole discussion and realize that what Steve and I did is very similar to the structure floated by John a month ago. So, thanks John. While we didn't directly refer back to what you wrote, I'm sure it was rattling away as we wrote the sample chapter.

Regarding an earlier comment on the concern about repeating the same information, I agree that can lead to problems. However, one area in the current rulebook that could be improved, is that things aren't repeated where they should be. For example, the Road Racing chapter referred back to passing rules in the Track chapter. Unicycling has matured so that the rules about passing for road racing (or other races, like muni) may very well be different than those for track, and so should be addressed specifically in the chapter. In addition, by being very careful about what gets put in Chapter 1, and keeping the structure consistent throughout the book, future rulebook committees should be able to avoid problems.

And, John is right - repeating information will make each chapter longer.  However, that is ok, because it is split up so that the section pertaining to each role is smaller. Also, we now have a place for things that haven't previously been written down.

Finally, I like the idea of expandable sections in an electronic version. It will give the Rulebook a dynamic, user-friendly feel that will be appealing. 

Comment 27 Jan 10:11

I'm also not sure about mixing numbers and letters, I would stick to only numbers if possible.

As for the structure of it, I love it. It makes a lot of sense and it looks good.

For the header, I would propose something including the most general header as well, so : "Part 3 Road Racing - 3.1 Competitor Rules".

Otherwise, great job everybody, this is a great step in the right direction!

B.

Comment 27 Jan 10:20

Quick question for Scott, does the program you use allow you to hide some section for printing?

I would be surprised, but it would come handy if we want to only print the Competitor Rules of each disciplines and make it a PDF for quick reference for the riders on the Unicon or IUF website.

It can obviously be done manually, but I was wondering.

Thanks.

B.

Comment 27 Jan 12:30

Benoit,

Latex doesn't really allow me to hide some sections for printing. Also we don't really want it to. I want to be able to print judging sections for example and I don't want that to be automatically hidden.

What Latex does allow is to easily exclude sections. This means we can create a "rider's version" of the rulebook that is a much smaller document. This would then be provided on the IUF website.

Comment 27 Jan 13:00

Other method, same result! Sweet, thanks. I need to learn Latex... ;-)

B.

Comment 27 Jan 13:03

Perhaps I am an atypical rider, but I would (as a rider, not as someone on this committee) want to download the full rulebook (all of the a, b, c and d parts) and decide for myself what I read. The page headings (with or without letters) would serve as my guide, along with the section headers of course. I strongly believe that the full rulebook should be as readily available to anyone as the "rider's version".

Comment 27 Jan 13:14

Klaas, a full version will certainly always be available. The "riders version" is just something to be offered along side to that, perhaps with a disclaimer that it is not the full version. 

Comment 27 Jan 13:58

I think, the numbering is obsolote and can be cut off. This is because I missunderstood something or interpret to much in what I read. Let me explain my understanding:

-> Chapters will be made available standalone, all-in-one or clicked together on demand.

I could think of this as an online webpage where you check the things you want to have included (I know this from software, where I can select the parts I need, instead of getting the whole thing). Given the following use-case: I want a certain chapter as standalone in one document. Does that start with the numbering 3? Nope, that makes no sense. Another use-case where I select multiple chapters. Do they have the numbering 3, 5 and 8? Makes no sense either.

I see those chapters as standalone with only references to the general part. As such, the numbering is only necessary within a chapter and happens at a top level:

1 Overview
  1.1 Definition
  1.2 Rider Summary
2 Competitor Rules
  2.1 Safety
  2.2 Unicycles
  2.3 Rider Identification
  2.4 Protests
  2.5 Event Flow
3 Judges and Officials Rules
  3.1 Race Director
  3.2 Referee
4 Event Organizer Rules

I still think of a webpage, where you can select the chapters you want and the final document will be generated, ready for you to download. During the discussion some options appeared: Include host part, Include general chapter (and another one, I just forget). The first one is obvious, the second one is interessting. In case the general chapter is included, references look like: "As explained in chapter 1 (page 8)", without chapter 1 included a reference looks like "as explained in IUF General Rules (page 8)" and a literature entry with "IUF General Rules" (or however it is named) and ways to find that one (typically a link to the pdf on the IUF homepage). All this would offer to have rules for each chapter as standalone without clutter.

What I'm trying to say, don't worry about the face/structure how it will look like. For the editors it is just a couple of commands and the best result is typically find by try-and-error during editing, with iterations that happen in minutes.

P.S. Here is an example (from software) where you can select parts you want to have: http://jqueryui.com/download/ (Quick downloads at the top, custom below - don't worry about the wording but I'm pretty sure you understand what I mean).

Comment 27 Jan 19:03

Yes to headers on every page. In a document like this, function is more important than aesthetics! And we can make pretty headers if we want. Yes, include the chapter or relevant section name in the header (I think we had this in much older versions).

Repeating information:
The reason we should ALWAYS avoid repeating information, assuming it's identical, is because it tends to get out of sync in future edits. This is a basic rule in data systems, not that I have any schooling in such things. Passing rules for Road racing are probably going to remain the same as the Non-Lane Passing Rules that existed before Road racing. But how to handle that? In an electronic version it's easy, just hyperlink that part of the Road section to the Track section. But this doesn't work on paper. I will take a moment here to point out that paper Rulebooks are pretty rare. I think the document will be much more popular, in the future, as an electronic document on a smartphone or tablet (or website). Same will be true for an increasing amount of other things printed on paper.

So what to do? We don't want to put it in Section 1; it doesn't belong there either. Our current approach to this problem is to "divorce" those two rules, even if they are the same, and treat each independently in its own section. That's an imperfect solution, since Non-Lane Track Passing and Road Race Passing rules will probably stay the same. It would be nice if they didn't deviate from each other; it will confuse riders and officials alike. Maybe the Latex platform (never used it) has a way to mark references in a document to keep them "mindful" of each other? Like a comment system where you note when a section is expected to be the same as a section in a different part of the Rulebook. I don't think we will have a huge amount of those.

I have no opinion about numbers vs. letters. That decision should be made by whoever is working on the actual document; based on what will make it work the best. With our distinct, stand-alone chapters, they could probably get by without numbers at all. No, I'm not recommending that. The General Rules should always be Section 1. But for the rest of it, it would be nice if users could re-arrange them in the order of importance to that rider. Or just to print only the ones they want.

Yes, whatever we come up with in the committee must be made available to the public. We definitely want people to read this stuff after all the thought we've put into it! And we know that unicyclists are major nerds. Many of us will want to read every word. That won't be a problem.

Comment 03 Feb 14:13

@gossi: to keep chapter numbers make a lot of sense / is a must.

Reason 1: You still can print the full book and so you need the chapters and chapter numbers

Reason 2: It is more easy to name a rule as 3.1.3 or 3.a.3 is always targeting on one rule with numbered chapter. if we have 1.1.3 / 1.a.3 in every chapter we maybe have thos 11 times which make it more difficult, not more easy

@ the Koehlers: great job so far !!!

@ all: a lot of good comments!