When learning new software I do best when I can read through the manual in one medium while working at the computer with the new software. It seems as if the user manual is only HTML – is there any possibility of creating a PDF manual so that people like me can read it on a different device, such as an iPad or SurfacePro, while working at the main computer with Dorico?
I do agree, it would be very useful to have the manual (particulary the key command list) available for download. For me this is very important, because my studio computer(s) are not connected with the internet and I prefer to study the program remote from the internet.
Rainer alias bodobiber
+1
(edit: redundant content deleted)
The key command list is already stored locally, even though it’s opened in your web browser. Have a look at the http address field, you will notice that it contains ‘localhost’. (At least it does here. )
There is a local copy of the HTML files that ships with Dorico for use when your Internet connection is unavailable.
Of course, it will be just a snapshot of the documentation that was available at the point that particular version of Dorico was released, but it’s better than nothing if you aren’t connected to the Internet!
If you want to access the offline version, simply disconnect from the Internet temporarily and click the “Help” > “Dorico Help” menu item.
There is a version of the shortcuts in the on-line docs that I printed as a PDF for my own use, but the graphic versions for some keys make it unwieldy, and I am trying to think of a way to reduce it to a document where I can reorder the commands and reduce it to one page I can have beside me for my own use.
I totally agree! - I want to be able to search for something in ONE document - not in a lot of different pages. At the least please combine all the help pages into one searchable PDF file.
Cubase and Sibelius (thank’s to Daniel who made an excellent manual for Sibelius) got it right 
Mads
Personally, I would prefer to see the manual in the EPUB format, so it can be easily read on nearly all systems and devices, including mobile devices and tablets.
PDF is nice, but it does not work well with smartphones, for example.
Searching for content should be just as easy, if not easier using a web-based version of the documentation. In the fullness of time, the intention is that the might and majesty of Google’s natural language processing will mean that you will be able to search for “how do I do X in Dorico?” and the right page will come up.
Once the documentation (and Dorico) has got to a point where the rate of change is less signifiant, I’d imagine that there will be options available for more static formats.
Not really - if I search for simple things like copy I get “duplicate players” and “copyright” - if I search for paste I get nada…
please… - ONE searchable file only…
Or am I not doing it right ?
I think that may be down to the fact that the completeness of the documentation is lagging somewhat behind the functionality in the application and so those terms aren’t fully outlined yet.
If you find a page in the documentation that isn’t reachable by an appropriate search, then that’s a bug we’ll need to investigate.
Searching for content should be easier in HTML but only if the content is actually there. Try searching for “delete bars” for example and see what you get. You’ll get links to deleting players, layouts, groups, flows, etc. but never how to delete a measure. This is possibly the most incomplete and useless documentation I have ever come across.
I would agree that, once one has a basic familiarity with the program, a web-based, inter-linked documentation is easier. But to start learning a program from scratch, for some of us at least, a more linear description–particularly in a format one can set down on the desk for reference as one uses the program–makes learning the program easier.
I don’t imagine the Development Team will be able to produce such a manual (at least not in the time they have available) as the program and documentation continue to develop; but I would not say that the current style of documentation (irrespective of completeness) is “easier.”
I accept this as a hazard of getting in on the ground floor and encourage the more complete documentation you suggest in your comment.
I’m with Derrek - it shouldn’t take too long to copy all the html files inte a single PDF ? - at least for starters.
Webbased is fine once you’re into the program.
Mads
Just to be clear, I wasn’t advocating copying all the “web screens” into a PDF doc.
I tested and downloaded the web help. First trial was A4-format, 888 pages in total (75% was repetion of header and footer etc.). Defining a larger page reduced the page count to 279 (which prob. is closer to the actual topics count) and fitted the contents better, but will not print well (on normal paper sizes). Biggest drawback is that the pages are not placed in the correct order. First all “Level 1” then all “Level 2”, etc. which shuffles the topics. It requires some manual moving to get it in correct order.
I cannot see how this is more helpful than a web based help. Most important, the next time the authors change anything, such a PDF is outdated and has to be done again. The authoring system prob. have a “Save project as PDF” function - RoboHelp had this back in 1998 IIRC, 18 years ago - but again, any such PDF would be outdated pretty quick.