new features page ...

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
48 messages Options
Next » 123 « Prev
sophi sophi
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...

On 17/01/2011 10:51, David Nelson wrote:
> Parting shot: ;-)
>
> Sophie, I can see you'll be *rejecting* my membership request when the
> time comes, due to my insubordinate and non-conformist attitudes! :-D
>
> "Not good team material, what?" :-D

I hope you are not meaning what you say, otherwise, I'll only have to go
away from this project.
And BTW, no need to put me in copy when you post to a public list.

Kind regards
Sophie

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Ivan M. Ivan M.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by Christoph Noack
Hi Christoph, David, all,

Sorry for the delayed response - I'll be answering more emails in this
thread soon.

On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Christoph Noack
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> [...]
> Since I've looked at the screenshots on the front page, I'd like to say
> that the documents look that much (much!) better than before ... also
> the Start Center (btw. not QuickStarter) looks better with some more
> space around (the first picture).
>
> But, only one picture doesn't fit that good - from the marketing's
> perspective. Since we try to establish "our" branding, the following
> picture is (although colorful) misleading how "we" look when installed.
> It might be mis-interpreted as Splashscreen [0], so you mind to remove
> it? Sorry to bother you with that :-\

+1. There is another picture that looks like an image generated by
some other piece of software thrown into Draw. Please correct me if
I'm wrong, but this image suggests functionality (the creation of such
graphics) that (as far as I am aware) is not actually present in Draw:
http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/Shuffler/Screenshot-09.png

> If we finally have some time to take a deep breath (a few weeks maybe?),
> I'd like to discuss the chosen theme. It seems a bit different to those
> that are "default", and (although it looks great on the computer), the
> dark title bars are a bit "visually heavy" and don't match to the
> LibreOffice branding (draft) [1].

True, but it would be difficult to find a theme that fits our branding
guidelines (unless we roll our own but I think we have more important
things to do). If anyone has suggestions, fire away! The default
OpenSUSE theme might be one option (as long as we don't get people
accusing us of being Novell supporters :P) as it uses both gray and
green.

>> Apart from that, we can format the layout the way you want it
>> (preferably without breaking out of the theme styles).
>
> See below, please ...
>
> [...]
>> > http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/features/3.3/index.html
>> >
>> >        I must confess I prefer the latter :-(
>
> I put up a small graphic to show how a structure might look like - would
> be great if Ivan could have a look at that, too. I think a subtle border
> (gray) would help to overcome screenshot snippets problems.
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/O-PELAb4LD61S9RPTFIW8Q?feat=directlink

As far as wireframes go, looks good to me. +1 for a clean and consistent layout.

> [...]
> All but the last category should only present a few improvements to
> avoid boring people to death ;-) Pre-prioritizing helps them to quickly
> decide "yes, that's worth to download". Let's say 3 ... 5 items per
> category like Writer. And, one highlight item (e.g. "More familiar
> keyboard shortcuts") might sum up some individual features (by the way,
> more familiar to whom ...).
>
>> >        David / Christophe - any objections to this sort of change ? - we can
>> > make screenshots small enough that there are few-to-no associated l10n
>> > issues, and even (in my view) plain, flat rectangles, without beautiful
>> > green drop-shadows (or whatever) would be rather good here (?)
>
> Very good! Shadows (if any) is up to Ivan, I'd say.

Green drop shadows are rarely a good idea :P

>> >        I'm happy to work on collecting the shots / files together.
>
> Last thing: Could you please keep the "New Features" (New Highlights) in
> one place - currently it appears under "Download - New Features", and
> "Features - New Features". Clicking on the latter "jumps" between
> different categories - without the user's intention.

Mm, information architecture is one thing we'll definitely need to
discuss in more detail.

I've added my availability on the Doodle poll. I'm all for a confcall,
as long as it's either available online for others to listen to, or at
least if good summaries are posted (still waiting for the SC meeting
confcall...)

> Okay, first iteration :-)
>
> I hope some of the stuff helps a bit - although I'm unable to do the
> feature selection stuff (sorry!), since we really have to continue with
> the new MIME type icons to get that included [4]. I still have some
> hope ...

They are looking fantastic - thank you, and keep up the great work!

Regards,
Ivan.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Ivan M. Ivan M.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by Christoph Noack
Hi Christoph, David, all,

Round 2!

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 6:59 AM, Christoph Noack <[hidden email]> wrote:
> [...]
> Ideally, the preview would provide the full screenshot to appear
> (Christian worked on something like that before).

We can easily throw in a lightbox:
http://leandrovieira.com/projects/jquery/lightbox/

This one allows very basic captions by grabbing the title attribute of
the <a> tag and displaying it in the lightbox itself.

> And even more ideally,
> users may just browse / being browsed through a collection of
> screenshots (with some brief words) that "visually" explains the new
> features. Oh, I seem to start dreaming :-) Just ideas...

Here's something that might do the job (again, with simple captions):
http://nivo.dev7studios.com/

It's easy enough to do (technically); what we really need are good
screenshots and text.

These are just some of the many options at our disposal...

> [...]
> My proposal was to pick up everything that had been included in the
> first LibO release, and to check against the strongest wishes of our
> user base (happily, we do have this data - so we can avoid too much
> guessing). So, our end-users can quickly find what's important to them:
> More downloads --> more happy users --> more market share --> more
> attractive project --> more users, developers, sponsors, ... :-)
>
> Although developers invest a lot of effort to work on important stuff,
> some of this work has almost no end-user related impact on LibreOffice
> (now). The job of marketing and UX is to help to connect the both (let's
> call it) worlds of "users" and "development" :-)

+1. Of course, developers are most welcome to join the lists and add
their thoughts.

Regards,
Ivan.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

davidnelson davidnelson
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by Ivan M.
Hi, :-)

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 17:39, Ivan M. <[hidden email]> wrote:
> +1. There is another picture that looks like an image generated by
> some other piece of software thrown into Draw. Please correct me if
> I'm wrong, but this image suggests functionality (the creation of such
> graphics) that (as far as I am aware) is not actually present in Draw:
> http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/Shuffler/Screenshot-09.png

This is not a design issue. This is content. if you disagree then
maybe we'd better take this back to the SC *again* to get things
clarified.

> Mm, information architecture is one thing we'll definitely need to
> discuss in more detail.

The IA is written content, so it's not something for you to decide. I
think you're stretching the scope of Design beyond its natural limits.
Maybe you need to take this before the SC again for clarification?

David Nelson

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Ivan M. Ivan M.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...

Hi David, all,

Round 4 and I'm KO'd. That's 2 hours I'd dedicated to LibreOffice gone today.

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 11:02 PM, David Nelson <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi, :-)
>
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 17:39, Ivan M. <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> +1. There is another picture that looks like an image generated by
>> some other piece of software thrown into Draw. Please correct me if
>> I'm wrong, but this image suggests functionality (the creation of such
>> graphics) that (as far as I am aware) is not actually present in Draw:
>> http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/Shuffler/Screenshot-09.png
>
> This is not a design issue. This is content. if you disagree then
> maybe we'd better take this back to the SC *again* to get things
> clarified.

The screenshots are not a textual content issue either ... or are
they? Did the SC decide to atomise and separate design, UX, textual
content and infrastructure so that these 4 groups work in their own
isolated compartments? I certainly hope not! We all probably have
different ideas as to where design stops and UX begins, so unless the
SC made a cut-and-dry decision on this, we will need to work together
in shared areas of interest, of which there will probably be many.

I'm still waiting for the confcall to be posted online so I can hear
what was actually decided rather than going by very brief minutes.
Until then (and probably afterwards as well), my comments will only be
those of an (active) contributor.

>> Mm, information architecture is one thing we'll definitely need to
>> discuss in more detail.
>
> The IA is written content, so it's not something for you to decide. I
> think you're stretching the scope of Design beyond its natural limits.
> Maybe you need to take this before the SC again for clarification?

See above. IA is certainly a matter for UX (e.g. see
http://www.deyalexander.com.au/resources/uxd/information-architecture.html).
It also relies on design for presentation. Beyond that, in the last
few years, usability has become crucial to (web) design itself (e.g.
www.smashingmagazine.com has its own usability section) - good (web)
design is no longer just about coding CSS and HTML and making
graphics; the (perceived) limits have shifted. Of course, as you
pointed out, IA (also) depends on textual content. My point is: IA
cannot be pinned down to 'textual content.'

Regards,
Ivan.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

davidnelson davidnelson
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...

Hey guys, :-)

First of all, let's not get mad at each other. ;-) Let's just push
LibreOffice forward in a positive way. Let's be a good team.

I want very much to talk voice to voice with you all. In my
collaboration with Ivan and Christian, i found that voice contact is
important in establishing good rapports. So I feel our discussions
will be better when we sit down and bash things out during a confcall.

But I think I am arriving at a few conclusions. You know, when I
pushed the website forward from nothing back in December, I very much
wanted to achieve a goal: I wanted LibreOffice to have its website.

Now, I am satisfied because that has happened.

However, I am wondering whether this is not a good time for me to take
a step back from this area of the project.

My key area of interest in LibreOffice is in documentation. We have
many interesting things happening there with Alfresco, and there is a
lot work for me to do there, too. We have two developers working on a
great workflow for the documentation team, and it can also provide an
excellent tool for docs, and for interested i18n people as well.

Maybe what I wanted to achieve with the website is done. Now there are
maybe other interesting opportunities for the libreoffice.org website
- a different for it to go.

Christoph is very interested in Drupal. So is Michael Wheatland.
Michael is also seems to be very interested in developing
LibreOffice's website in exciting and imaginative directions.

IMHO, Michael chose an incorrect way forward when he chose to stand
aside from the SilverStripe site and develop his Drupal-based plans on
a lone path. That's the past, and a resolved problem - the
SilverStripe site is up and running now.

But I see a chance to bring him back into the mainstream of the
project by encouraging him (and his "Drupal boys") to take a leading
role in the development of the SilverStripe website as a superb
communications and marketing tool for Libreoffice and TDF.

I can still be there to play an assistive role in the wings, with some
great ideas, too. But Michael could take on the main written content
development role, working in close symbiosis with Christoph and Ivan.
I feel they will have a close empathy and an excellent working
relationship.

I feel that this is a novel and creative solution to what could
otherwise become a conflictual and unproductive situation. We will all
win. Most important of all, LIBREOFFICE and TDF will win.

What do you think? I am including Michael in this mail, and I want to
hear his feelings on this.

Me? I have big plans to take the documentation project forward, to
accompany the strong growth I feel can be achieved for our project.

David Nelson

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

davidnelson davidnelson
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...

Hi, :-)

A few additional ideas for consideration:

Michael is very interested in "doing stuff" with Drupal. Like Michael,
I personally prefer forums as a support channel for the English NL
community. Drupal originally evolved from forum software, so it is
naturally very strong in that area. Perhaps Michael would like to take
a leading role in developing Drupal-based forums on a libreoffice.org
sub-domain?

That could satisfy his hunger to do something with Drupal, while
reconciling himself to the fact that TDF has currently decided to stay
with SilverStripe as its CMS - at least for the mid-term future
(although once SilverStripe has been fully operational for a while,
and once the NL subsites have increased in number and thoroughly
developed their content, it will become increasingly inconvenient to
migrate in the future).

AFAIK, Christian might also find that to be a good solution: if I
gaged his POV correctly, he seems to quite favor "best of breed"
solutions.

Me, I see SilverStripe as a perfectly satisfactory choice of CMS. For
instance, it caters nicely to the project's NL sites' needs.

In any case, the most interesting aspect of running the
libreoffice.org CMS is not so much the technical administration of the
actual CMS chosen, it's more the communications and marketing you can
do with it for the project's benefit. It's a mixture of journalism,
communications and marketing, in fact, as well as community
cultivation and management.

Here, I'm wondering if Christoph and I don't have somewhat divergent
perceptions about this. Plus, I feel that Christoph would like to feel
very much in the driver's seat with regard to many aspects of the
website.

For myself, I'd love to take the website forward in some exciting
directions. And I would not like to feel too fettered, or I couldn't
really effectively do what I imagine. But I'm starting to wonder
whether Christoph, and maybe some other SC members, would really feel
comfortable with what I would like to set out to achieve.

I certainly would not want to work at cross purposes to the other
website team leads, and would not like to operate within a conflictual
relationship.

Is it possible that Michael and Christoph would have more-convergent ideas?

In any case, as I've said before in other threads, I'd like to see
Charles, Florian and Italo take a much more hands-on role in the
communications via the website, and to be more proactive in using it
as a tool...

In addition, my vision of the project's Web communications would
involve a more-coordinated use of libreoffice.org, the TDF blog and
the documentfoundation.org website (which I feel should be migrated to
SilverStripe as quickly as possible, so as to be able to develop and
operate it more effectively and easily). I would envision a much more
holistic approach than TDF presently seems to have in mind.

I wanted to share these ideas with you, and I'm willing to follow your
wishes. I think it was a good decision by the SC to appoint an
"editing team" (or whatever you want to call it). But I think it's
worth reviewing whether I'm quite your best choice for leading the
content management role.

In the light of all I've said above, what do you think?

I'm still hoping that Michael will also tell us his own thoughts about all this.

David Nelson

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Michael Meeks Michael Meeks
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by Christoph Noack
Hi guys,

        So - this thread turned amusing, before I could even get to it. Perhaps
one of our problems is a workload, and hence response time mismatch
between people.

On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 22:55 +0100, Christoph Noack wrote:
> great suggestion. It seems it pays off to bore you with all this UX
> related stuff ;-)))

        So - first; smiley aside - when I read this I feel like my interest in,
work on, and experience with UX in the past is being ignored. That is
unfortunate, and I am sure not your intention, yet it happens :-)

        My impression is that UX is really important, too important to leave
just to designers ;-) and that educating developers to understand and
consider UX in what they do is critical. There are IMHO a vast class of
UX problems that are so 'obvious' when considering some simple use-cases
such that they can be tackled without external help. I see a vast amount
of the UX role as winsomely educating developers, so that they can think
for themselves - hopefully (as you say) that will happen over time.

> Since I've looked at the screenshots on the front page, I'd like to say

        Separately, I love your praise for what David has done; and I too think
it is a huge improvement :-)

> I put up a small graphic to show how a structure might look like - would
> be great if Ivan could have a look at that, too. I think a subtle border
> (gray) would help to overcome screenshot snippets problems.
>
> http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/O-PELAb4LD61S9RPTFIW8Q?feat=directlink

        Ok - it is a nice graphic. Unfortunately, not all our features are
graphical in any way. "More familiar keybindings" eg. ;-) do you think
your layout works well for that ? Also - who is going to provide this
extra body text (in addition to the short description ?).

> Don't be scared by the colors

        :-) of course not.

> @ Michael: The OOo features page seems a bit messy, since the pictures
> have different width - there is no harmony. Moreover, the whole page
> looks like to win the "most headers" award ;-)

        Yes - totally agreed; I said I prefered it not because it was good, but
because it is better - and that is saying something :-)

> So here is my initial "flat list" proposal how the page can be
> structured:
>       * All Applications --> Major improvements shared by all
>         applications
>       * Writer (Word Processor)
>       * Calc (Spreadsheet)
>       * Impress (Presentation)
>       * Draw (Vector Graphics)
>       * Base (Database)
>       * Math (Formula Editor)
>       * Internationalization
>       * Developer Features and Extensibility
>       * More Improvements

        Which sounds fine; at least I'm happy with it.

> All but the last category should only present a few improvements to
> avoid boring people to death ;-) Pre-prioritizing helps them to quickly
> decide "yes, that's worth to download". Let's say 3 ... 5 items per
> category like Writer. And, one highlight item (e.g. "More familiar
> keyboard shortcuts") might sum up some individual features (by the way,
> more familiar to whom ...).

        *but* here is the problem - we need someone to do this prioritisation
work. Thus far, I did some fixing and better ordering of the categories,
clearer explanation, and slightly better prioritisation of the data, but
it needs more work.

        Furthermore, it is my conviction that the people doing the work should
substantially make the decisions about it; the advice above could be
seen as stretching into micro-management - deciding all the 'fun' stuff,
and yet leaving all the donkey work to someone else :-) This is *really*
not a good place to go. Reading the level of detailed demand here -
personally I feel de-motivated to improve the web-site from where it is
already :-) I also feel like there is more detail underneath, and that I
am going to need to ask advice on any minor change I make myself - in
short I feel like I've been demoted to a raw typing machine - if even
that :-) I am sure that is not your intention either ! :-) indeed, it is
a tragedy if giving good advice in too much volume, via de-motivation
results in no improvement at all.

        So - the points you make are all good - I agree with them; but are
perhaps over-detailed; personally I would prefer to see some far less
detailed suggestions, presenting the same data - but in a much more
free-form way leaving the person doing the work lots of room to do as
they choose. Hopefully - that means even less work for you to do on this
topic :-) I imagine that carefully writing long and detailed E-mails
takes a lot of time; on the other hand - if you're passionate about
detail in this piece - personally I'd prefer to see you do the textual
re-arrangement yourself - ie. do the whole thing to get it exactly how
you like.

> <fun>Of course, there is a need to include that great new printing
> dialog [2] - whoever helped to shape that.</fun>

        Oh - did we miss some key features ? [ that seems highly probable ], if
so what ? again we need the work put into the list there I guess.

> Ah, so he is the one to prepare for a huge mail with feedback [3] to
> keep him busy ;-)

        Caolan is plenty busy.

> > >        * And some of our import filters:
> > >                + SVG, Works, Wordperfect, Lotus Word Pro
> > >                + better EMF rendering
> > >                + perhaps pictures of bundled extensions (?)
>
> The term extensions doesn't help here ...

        Sure - but the idea of showing some pictures of them is perhaps
sensible ? :-)

> > >        Of course, I'd love to have the relevant files linked as well, so
> > > people can try that out quickly ( cf. the obsolete
> > > http://go-oo.org/discover ); IMHO that adds a lot.
>
> Mmh, seems that this list already considers a lot of my suggestions
> above ;-) Cool page!

        Glad you like it; the discover page was created by applying pure
common-sense by developers.

> > >        David / Christophe - any objections to this sort of change ? - we can
> > > make screenshots small enough that there are few-to-no associated l10n
> > > issues, and even (in my view) plain, flat rectangles, without beautiful
> > > green drop-shadows (or whatever) would be rather good here (?)
>
> Very good! Shadows (if any) is up to Ivan, I'd say.

        Hmm; looking at the things we need to screenshot some more - I don't
believe we can avoid the l10n problems; so we will need the files
linked / nearby for any l10n.

> Last thing: Could you please keep the "New Features" (New Highlights) in
> one place - currently it appears under "Download - New Features", and
> "Features - New Features". Clicking on the latter "jumps" between
> different categories - without the user's intention.

        So - I appreciate these jumps are ugly, and I asked expressly for this
myself and David kindly added one. We already had one for the Developers
tab - it was a personal requirement that we have a top-level
'Development' tab.

        Here is the reason for this jump: I won't bore you with a great long
user scenario - but existing OO.o users will hit the site, and -before-
downloading, will want to know what new features they will get: as in
"why bother".

        Which tab will they hit ? - they are interested in "Features" - they
hit that; and immediately get presented with a long (and lovely) blurb
about things they already know about suitable for new users but not
them.

        Adding the "New Features" link - (personally I would have had it on the
left of 'Writer' since I believe it is far more interesting to most
people), allows them to find what they are looking for.

        Do you disagree with the user scenario or use-case ?

        Of course; we have another user scenario, of people who are signed up
for LibreOffice, and wish to post-rationalise their decision while they
download, explaining the existing location: this is also a common use
case I suspect.

        So - I am not a UX guy, but I'd like these two scenarios to flow
smoothly. The tab/link seems to (partially) do it, at the cost of some
jumpiness in the tab metaphore. Perhaps there is a better way.

        Ultimately I think you're going to have jumpy tabs if you use explicit
web-style links to other pages, and also force readers to read
lower-down too: perhaps not what we want. Potentially we could put the
content in two places [ not sure silverstripe will like that though -
may be very manual ].

        Thoughts appreciated.

> I hope some of the stuff helps a bit - although I'm unable to do the
> feature selection stuff (sorry!), since we really have to continue with
> the new MIME type icons to get that included [4]. I still have some
> hope ...

        This is great work :-) and much appreciated, and I realise there is
very little time here.

        Anyhow - I hope this was not too critical, and you can see the rational
behind it.

        Thanks !

                Michael.

--
 [hidden email]  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Michael Meeks Michael Meeks
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by davidnelson
Hi David, Ivan & co.

        So, first - I think it is worth saying that conflict is normal; -and-
it is particularly normal in teams that are just changed / formed. A
so-called "Forming / Storming / Norming / Performing" phase change :-)
it would be nice to skip stage two, and three - and jump to stage four -
but its not going to happen.

        So - what do we do ? in stage two we have to bear with each other, not
burn bridges, communicate clearly (preferably not by E-mail - which is
no way to resolve conflict), and there is some level of learning and
teeth gritting by all required.

        By not burning bridges, I am concerned by this "my way or the highway"
attitude that we all seem to have swallowed; this is not going to help I
think - it just escalates the situation.

        Just FWIW, the SC itself went through this Storming phase itself only a
month or so ago, and - well, I think we're well into a Norming /
Performing phase now; so it is -absolutely-nothing- to do with egos,
characters, especially 'hard to work with' people - it is just totally
normal :-)

        Anyhow, with that under our belts:

On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 21:39 +0800, David Nelson wrote:
> First of all, let's not get mad at each other. ;-)

        I assume this is some sort of apology ? :-) if so, it could perhaps be
lengthier[1] ;-)

> David Nelson wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 Ivan M. <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > +1. There is another picture that looks like an image generated by
> > some other piece of software thrown into Draw. Please correct me if
> > I'm wrong, but this image suggests functionality (the creation of
> > such graphics) that (as far as I am aware) is not actually present
> > in Draw:
> > http://www.libreoffice.org/assets/Shuffler/Screenshot-09.png

        Personally - I love that screenshot in particular; because it looks
cool, and (in part) makes LibreOffice look rather good - as such, it
seems like great marketing collateral. It is common to use rich artwork,
and imported content to make things look richer than perhaps they are.
eg. the 'draw' screenshots tend to show some CAD/CAM type image that
(clearly!) was never drawn in the product; or some SVG straight out of
inkscape (or whatever).

        Surely this is just normal marketing ? :-)

        Now - of course, that is my view, irrelevant as it is - hopefully it
persuasive :-) but you guys are empowered, and need to sort this (minor)
issue out together; preferably by friendly, rational discussion and
bearing with each other.

> This is not a design issue. This is content. if you disagree then
> maybe we'd better take this back to the SC *again* to get things
> clarified.

        But this is is not a good response I think; Who actually cares to split
this semantic hair ? the SC I strongly suspect is not going to get
involved in this kind of detail adjudicating whether a screenshot is
content or not - simply because you can split hairs infinitely: is the
theme graphical, and the text content ? what about the font ? what about
the font size ? what about the zoom level ? what about the number of
pixels in the screenshots ? what about ? ... by the time we get here -
it is obvious that the problem is elsewhere :-)

        In my view, it is far better to reason as winsomely as possible about
the issue.

>  Let's just push LibreOffice forward in a positive way. Let's be a good team.

        Agreed.

> I want very much to talk voice to voice with you all. In my
> collaboration with Ivan and Christian, i found that voice contact is
> important in establishing good rapports. So I feel our discussions
> will be better when we sit down and bash things out during a confcall.

        There is much wisdom in this. There is more wisdom, in not writing
E-mail when angry; and if you must - then expressing your feelings
(privately, not on-list) to the person in a neutral way - so you can
work it out together. I don't think anyone gets involved in this great
work to make people annoyed - but to try to get a good result.

        Anyhow - so, the rest I think is nonsense: lets not step back or
threaten this; four people took this commitment on - please guys, can
you get through the Storming phase as fast as possible & into the
smooth, friendly fun phase ? :-)

        I'm sorry to prod the hornets nest - but ...

        All the best,

                Michael.

[1] - learning to apologise for things you didn't think you did is a
most wonderful and gratifying skill to acquire :-)
--
 [hidden email]  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Charles Marcus Charles Marcus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by davidnelson
On 2011-01-17 7:24 PM, David Nelson wrote:

> Michael is very interested in "doing stuff" with Drupal. Like Michael,
> I personally prefer forums as a support channel for the English NL
> community. Drupal originally evolved from forum software, so it is
> naturally very strong in that area. Perhaps Michael would like to take
> a leading role in developing Drupal-based forums on a libreoffice.org
> sub-domain?
>
> That could satisfy his hunger to do something with Drupal, while
> reconciling himself to the fact that TDF has currently decided to stay
> with SilverStripe as its CMS - at least for the mid-term future
> (although once SilverStripe has been fully operational for a while,
> and once the NL subsites have increased in number and thoroughly
> developed their content, it will become increasingly inconvenient to
> migrate in the future).

So maybe Drupal could actually be the *support* site, since Michael said
it was capable of *integrating* the forums and mail lists (and
newsgroups), so that users could choose their preferred method of
interacting, but still keep everything in one place so no one misses
anything?

--

Best regards,

Charles

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Andrea Pescetti Andrea Pescetti
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by sophi
On 14/01/2011 Sophie Gautier wrote:
> a small amount of Go-oo
> features have been incorporated for now. More will come later, once
> our users base is consolidated.

Really? I expected most of the Go-OO features had made their way into
LibreOffice, or at least http://planet.go-oo.org/ made me think so.

Users of Linux-based systems who use the pre-installed OpenOffice.org
packages are in many cases using something that is branded
"OpenOffice.org" but that is closer to Go-OO than to the pristine
OpenOffice.org. And often they are not aware of it.

So if significant Go-OO features have been removed (or not integrated,
depending on how you see it) in LibreOffice, a section about this should
be included in the Features page to help the former users of Go-OO.

Regards,
  Andrea.


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Christian Lohmaier (klammer) Christian Lohmaier (klammer)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by Michael Meeks
Hi *,

It's too much detail to answer everything, thus I focus on the techy
stuff only :-)

On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Michael Meeks <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 22:55 +0100, Christoph Noack wrote:
> [...]
>        Ultimately I think you're going to have jumpy tabs if you use explicit
> web-style links to other pages, and also force readers to read
> lower-down too: perhaps not what we want. Potentially we could put the
> content in two places [ not sure silverstripe will like that though -
> may be very manual ].

Silverstripe knows the concept of "Virtual pages" that act as if the
content would be duplicated at the corresponding place (the current
Developer tab however is a "Redirector" page)

So yes, you could have content duplicated in multiple places, but the
context-information (left-hand menu) is of course dependent on where
the page resides. (If Developer would be a virtual page, you won't get
the second-level menu with QA, Designers, Documenters, Donors - you'd
only get the Developer's page as it would behave as a page on its own
in toplevel)

ciao
Christian

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Charles Marcus Charles Marcus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by davidnelson
On 2011-01-17 8:39 AM, David Nelson wrote:
> But I see a chance to bring him back into the mainstream of the
> project by encouraging him (and his "Drupal boys") to take a leading
> role in the development of the SilverStripe website as a superb
> communications and marketing tool for Libreoffice and TDF.

I also think that, if Michael were so inclined, Drupal could initially
serve as the 'support' backend, with its potential for integrating all
of the different support modes (email lists, forums and newsgroups)...
this would give it the opportunity to 'prove' itself (personally, I have
no idea if Drupal can even truly achieve this, much less is preferable
over Silverstripe)...

> I can still be there to play an assistive role in the wings, with
> some great ideas, too. But Michael could take on the main written
> content development role, working in close symbiosis with Christoph
> and Ivan. I feel they will have a close empathy and an excellent
> working relationship.
>
> I feel that this is a novel and creative solution to what could
> otherwise become a conflictual and unproductive situation. We will
> all win. Most important of all, LIBREOFFICE and TDF will win.
>
> What do you think? I am including Michael in this mail, and I want
> to hear his feelings on this.

I think its a great idea if Michael is willing to take it on...

--

Best regards,

Charles

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Wheatbix Wheatbix
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Charles Marcus
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 2011-01-17 8:39 AM, David Nelson wrote:
>> But I see a chance to bring him back into the mainstream of the
>> project by encouraging him (and his "Drupal boys") to take a leading
>> role in the development of the SilverStripe website as a superb
>> communications and marketing tool for Libreoffice and TDF.
>
> I also think that, if Michael were so inclined, Drupal could initially
> serve as the 'support' backend, with its potential for integrating all
> of the different support modes (email lists, forums and newsgroups)...
> this would give it the opportunity to 'prove' itself (personally, I have
> no idea if Drupal can even truly achieve this, much less is preferable
> over Silverstripe)...
>
>> I can still be there to play an assistive role in the wings, with
>> some great ideas, too. But Michael could take on the main written
>> content development role, working in close symbiosis with Christoph
>> and Ivan. I feel they will have a close empathy and an excellent
>> working relationship.
>>
>> I feel that this is a novel and creative solution to what could
>> otherwise become a conflictual and unproductive situation. We will
>> all win. Most important of all, LIBREOFFICE and TDF will win.
>>
>> What do you think? I am including Michael in this mail, and I want
>> to hear his feelings on this.
>
> I think its a great idea if Michael is willing to take it on...
>
> Best regards,
>
> Charles

Charles,
I like the idea, but I think it is worth waiting for the conference
call to discuss.
This is achievable, however it will take some time setting up and
configuring, and in the same time we could have all the same
functionality as the existing site on one unified system, allowing us
to automatically manage all of the cross links between the systems. We
might end up creating a monster that we need to manually manage. I
will look into the possibilities prior to the meeting.

Again, it is a great idea. I will add it to the agenda for the Conference Call.

Thanks,
Mike Wheatland

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Christoph Noack Christoph Noack
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by Michael Meeks
Hi!

Since Christian already jumped in for the technical stuff ... let's
focus on the UX part :-)

Am Dienstag, den 18.01.2011, 12:15 +0000 schrieb Michael Meeks:
[...]
> > http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/O-PELAb4LD61S9RPTFIW8Q?feat=directlink
>
> Ok - it is a nice graphic. Unfortunately, not all our features are
> graphical in any way. "More familiar keybindings" eg. ;-) do you think
> your layout works well for that ? Also - who is going to provide this
> extra body text (in addition to the short description ?).

Everybody is free to add some text here. I would even appreciate, if the
developer teams (devs, QA, ...) would have something they use anyway.

For example, we've created:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Printerpullpages#Summary

And by the way, isn't this also a new feature for LibO 3.3?


Concerning the graphics - you are right that some features are not
graphical. But since you want to address the people to quickly go
through a list, a picture helps. If nothing suits well, then it may be
possible ...
      * join some feature descriptions that fit together
      * use a placeholder graphic / handmade graphic (Design Team?)
      * add these features "at the bottom" of each category (full width)

Second iteration done ;-)

[...]

> > All but the last category should only present a few improvements to
> > avoid boring people to death ;-) Pre-prioritizing helps them to quickly
> > decide "yes, that's worth to download". Let's say 3 ... 5 items per
> > category like Writer. And, one highlight item (e.g. "More familiar
> > keyboard shortcuts") might sum up some individual features (by the way,
> > more familiar to whom ...).
>
> *but* here is the problem - we need someone to do this prioritisation
> work. Thus far, I did some fixing and better ordering of the categories,
> clearer explanation, and slightly better prioritisation of the data, but
> it needs more work.

I think Sophie worked on something like that evolved within the FR
community - as far as I know.

[...]

> > <fun>Of course, there is a need to include that great new printing
> > dialog [2] - whoever helped to shape that.</fun>
>
> Oh - did we miss some key features ? [ that seems highly probable ], if
> so what ? again we need the work put into the list there I guess.

Well, it depends if this list is LibO unique, or if OOo features may be
added as well. Since I've did the most of the UX work, it would be
somehow inbetween ;-)

If yes, I can try to provide something...


> > Ah, so he is the one to prepare for a huge mail with feedback [3] to
> > keep him busy ;-)
>
> Caolan is plenty busy.

I know, good people are always busy. Just wondering why I seem to have
that much time to write emails ;-)))


> > > >        Of course, I'd love to have the relevant files linked as well, so
> > > > people can try that out quickly ( cf. the obsolete
> > > > http://go-oo.org/discover ); IMHO that adds a lot.
> >
> > Mmh, seems that this list already considers a lot of my suggestions
> > above ;-) Cool page!
>
> Glad you like it; the discover page was created by applying pure
> common-sense by developers.

That's good to know ... but I assume that there have been some
iterations until the page was finally made up. I hope we will come to a
state, that more people step in and apply their common-sense.

[...]

> > Last thing: Could you please keep the "New Features" (New Highlights) in
> > one place - currently it appears under "Download - New Features", and
> > "Features - New Features". Clicking on the latter "jumps" between
> > different categories - without the user's intention.
>
> So - I appreciate these jumps are ugly, and I asked expressly for this
> myself and David kindly added one. We already had one for the Developers
> tab - it was a personal requirement that we have a top-level
> 'Development' tab.

I know, the second time already :-)

> Here is the reason for this jump: I won't bore you with a great long
> user scenario - but existing OO.o users will hit the site, and -before-
> downloading, will want to know what new features they will get: as in
> "why bother".

As I stated earlier, you requested to retrieve the information quickly -
but it might be something different in terms of solution.

> Which tab will they hit ? - they are interested in "Features" - they
> hit that; and immediately get presented with a long (and lovely) blurb
> about things they already know about suitable for new users but not
> them.
>
> Adding the "New Features" link - (personally I would have had it on the
> left of 'Writer' since I believe it is far more interesting to most
> people), allows them to find what they are looking for.
>
> Do you disagree with the user scenario or use-case ?

No, just fine!

> Of course; we have another user scenario, of people who are signed up
> for LibreOffice, and wish to post-rationalise their decision while they
> download, explaining the existing location: this is also a common use
> case I suspect.
>
> So - I am not a UX guy, but I'd like these two scenarios to flow
> smoothly. The tab/link seems to (partially) do it, at the cost of some
> jumpiness in the tab metaphore. Perhaps there is a better way.
>
> Ultimately I think you're going to have jumpy tabs if you use explicit
> web-style links to other pages, and also force readers to read
> lower-down too: perhaps not what we want. Potentially we could put the
> content in two places [ not sure silverstripe will like that though -
> may be very manual ].

Okay, so I understand you want to avoid too much reading, but we assume
that the use cases are important.

Adding the links in the menu - where we already have numerous items -
will also slow down finding the information. Instead, I'd propose to
group the most important information next to the download.

The purpose of the Download page (usually) is less to provide a lot of
information, but to quickly provide visual navigation. So the already
stated "action links / buttons" may make sense. The help to provide a
visual anchor, limit the number of information in the menu, and group
the page structure.

--------------------------------------------------------------

                   (upper part of the download page)

Short introduction text, short         What's new?
introduction text, short intro
duction text, short introduction       Installing Instructions
text, short introduction text,
short introduction text, ...           Computer Requirements

                    (The rest of the download page)

--------------------------------------------------------------

These additional links (here: "What's new?") might be less obstrusive,
but well visible buttons rest of the page.

If required, I'm happy to draft something ... but this might take some
time. Or Ivan, do you have another / an additional idea?

Thanks for reading!


Cheers,
Christoph


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
bedipp bedipp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: new features page ...

In reply to this post by Wheatbix
Hi Michael, Charles, all,

Michael Wheatland schrieb:

> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Charles Marcus
> <[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> On 2011-01-17 8:39 AM, David Nelson wrote:
>>> But I see a chance to bring him back into the mainstream of the
>>> project by encouraging him (and his "Drupal boys") to take a leading
>>> role in the development of the SilverStripe website as a superb
>>> communications and marketing tool for Libreoffice and TDF.
>>
>> I also think that, if Michael were so inclined, Drupal could initially
>> serve as the 'support' backend, with its potential for integrating all
>> of the different support modes (email lists, forums and newsgroups)...
>> this would give it the opportunity to 'prove' itself (personally, I have
>> no idea if Drupal can even truly achieve this, much less is preferable
>> over Silverstripe)...

So please let us focus on the present work - when it is done, any other
tool can be considered if it fits better.

>>
>>> [...]
>
> Charles,
> I like the idea, but I think it is worth waiting for the conference
> call to discuss.
> This is achievable, however it will take some time setting up and
> configuring, and in the same time we could have all the same
> functionality as the existing site on one unified system, allowing us
> to automatically manage all of the cross links between the systems.

Thank you Michael for these well-thought words.

At the moment we're in the end phase before our release (you all know
that RC 4 is out?).

The Features page needs to be finished before the release - so we should
stick with the present solution.

> We
> might end up creating a monster that we need to manually manage. I
> will look into the possibilities prior to the meeting.

Please again: Let us continue working on the *present site*.

Here we need to find out, what is necessary to finish before the the
release.

There are areas that need urgent work, others are not so important, but
should be addressed too.

Christoph wanted to come up with a structured wiki page where these
tasks can be added and prioritized. I don't know if he already did some
work on this...

Perhaps the most urgent tasks can be addressed before the call -
everything else should be discussed IMHO.

Best regards

Bernhard

PS: Proposing Drupal solutions for any task seems not to be the best way
at this very special situation. Even if there might be modules for such
tasks, this doesn't help at the moment. The SC asked the Drupal
proponents to step back with these proposals - not because Drupal is no
solution for LibreOffice, but because these proposals caused lots of
mails in the past, leading to unproductivity and bad feelings on each side.

Please let us keep focused on the work at the moment. When the present
site is in a final state, the team has shown how it works and Drupal has
lost it's "red rag" meaning to some community members, we can consider
all of these possibilities. To keep the proposals in mind, they should
be added to the wiki.

Does this sound reasonable?

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Wheatbix Wheatbix
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: new features page ...

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Bernhard Dippold
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Please let us keep focused on the work at the moment. When the present site
> is in a final state, the team has shown how it works and Drupal has lost
> it's "red rag" meaning to some community members, we can consider all of
> these possibilities. To keep the proposals in mind, they should be added to
> the wiki.
>
> Does this sound reasonable?

I fully agree with your statement. There are reasons we started
exploring the Drupal solution so early, however it is clear that we
need to look at what we have now in order to complete the simple
product marketing part of the site.

The 'rush' to get an initial code base and stable release has been
much faster than any of us expected. We need to keep up and meet our
responsibilities.

Mike

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Narayan Aras Narayan Aras
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

How to avoid a pressure cooker situation in the meeting

In reply to this post by Wheatbix

Hi Mike, David, all-

The agenda has 10 topics. Too many for a 1 hour session.
(http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website/ConfCall/Agenda).

We will have only 5 minutes to settle each topic.

The discussions will not be conclusive in this pressure cooker situation.
Then we will come to the "storm" (or "fission") stage even before we realize! :)

Having a series of calls is not feasible, as that approach needs a lot of time.
Besides, we are finding it difficult to set up this FIRST call itself.
So setting up so many calls till we trash out all issues is virtually impossible.

Therefore, it is best to settle at least the fundamental differences offline.
That leaves the main meeting to settle finer details, and to ratify what was agreed offline.

Assuming that we agree to use an offline tool to argue our case, the next question is "which tool"?

Well, the simplest tool (which is also readily available) is a wiki discussion page.

However, it cannot handle counterarguments that have to be attached to a specific part of someone else's statement. Also, when in a multi-person argument, it would quickly become confusing who is opposing whose views fully/party/conditionally.

In other words, it cannot create an argument map properly. (Which is the need of the hour).

A concept map does that extremely well.

Another advantage of a Concept map is that it also allows us to split a larger issue, and discuss the parts separately and then combine the conclusions again.

Concept map also allows us to interrelate different streams of arguments as the plot gets larger with more and more arguments added. Note that no other tool is good at this.

Therefore I suggest using a concept map tool like CMAP, Freemind, graphmind. or even brainstorm.

Someone will need to set up this tool temporarily.

What do you think?

If you have any doubt, we could try out one (contentious) topic on a wiki discussion page.


Regards,
Narayan


> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:11:33 +0930
> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new features page ...
> From: [hidden email]
> To: [hidden email]
>
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Charles Marcus
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 2011-01-17 8:39 AM, David Nelson wrote:
> >> But I see a chance to bring him back into the mainstream of the
> >> project by encouraging him (and his "Drupal boys") to take a leading
> >> role in the development of the SilverStripe website as a superb
> >> communications and marketing tool for Libreoffice and TDF.
> >
> > I also think that, if Michael were so inclined, Drupal could initially
> > serve as the 'support' backend, with its potential for integrating all
> > of the different support modes (email lists, forums and newsgroups)...
> > this would give it the opportunity to 'prove' itself (personally, I have
> > no idea if Drupal can even truly achieve this, much less is preferable
> > over Silverstripe)...
> >
> >> I can still be there to play an assistive role in the wings, with
> >> some great ideas, too. But Michael could take on the main written
> >> content development role, working in close symbiosis with Christoph
> >> and Ivan. I feel they will have a close empathy and an excellent
> >> working relationship.
> >>
> >> I feel that this is a novel and creative solution to what could
> >> otherwise become a conflictual and unproductive situation. We will
> >> all win. Most important of all, LIBREOFFICE and TDF will win.
> >>
> >> What do you think? I am including Michael in this mail, and I want
> >> to hear his feelings on this.
> >
> > I think its a great idea if Michael is willing to take it on...
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Charles
>
> Charles,
> I like the idea, but I think it is worth waiting for the conference
> call to discuss.
> This is achievable, however it will take some time setting up and
> configuring, and in the same time we could have all the same
> functionality as the existing site on one unified system, allowing us
> to automatically manage all of the cross links between the systems. We
> might end up creating a monster that we need to manually manage. I
> will look into the possibilities prior to the meeting.
>
> Again, it is a great idea. I will add it to the agenda for the Conference Call.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike Wheatland
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
     
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Varun Mittal Varun Mittal
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to avoid a pressure cooker situation in the meeting

+1




Thank You

Best Regards
Varun Mittal <http://www.varunmittal.info>

Google <https://www.google.com/profiles/varunmittal87>
Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/mittal.varun>
   LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/varunmittal87>
Twitter<http://twitter.com/varunmittal19>

"Uncertainty is the only Certainty of LIFE"



On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Narayan Aras <[hidden email]>wrote:

>
> Hi Mike, David, all-
>
> The agenda has 10 topics. Too many for a 1 hour session.
> (http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website/ConfCall/Agenda).
>
> We will have only 5 minutes to settle each topic.
>
> The discussions will not be conclusive in this pressure cooker situation.
> Then we will come to the "storm" (or "fission") stage even before we
> realize! :)
>
> Having a series of calls is not feasible, as that approach needs a lot of
> time.
> Besides, we are finding it difficult to set up this FIRST call itself.
> So setting up so many calls till we trash out all issues is virtually
> impossible.
>
> Therefore, it is best to settle at least the fundamental differences
> offline.
> That leaves the main meeting to settle finer details, and to ratify what
> was agreed offline.
>
> Assuming that we agree to use an offline tool to argue our case, the next
> question is "which tool"?
>
> Well, the simplest tool (which is also readily available) is a wiki
> discussion page.
>
> However, it cannot handle counterarguments that have to be attached to a
> specific part of someone else's statement. Also, when in a multi-person
> argument, it would quickly become confusing who is opposing whose views
> fully/party/conditionally.
>
> In other words, it cannot create an argument map properly. (Which is the
> need of the hour).
>
> A concept map does that extremely well.
>
> Another advantage of a Concept map is that it also allows us to split a
> larger issue, and discuss the parts separately and then combine the
> conclusions again.
>
> Concept map also allows us to interrelate different streams of arguments as
> the plot gets larger with more and more arguments added. Note that no other
> tool is good at this.
>
> Therefore I suggest using a concept map tool like CMAP, Freemind,
> graphmind. or even brainstorm.
>
> Someone will need to set up this tool temporarily.
>
> What do you think?
>
> If you have any doubt, we could try out one (contentious) topic on a wiki
> discussion page.
>
>
> Regards,
> Narayan
>
>
> > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 08:11:33 +0930
> > Subject: Re: [libreoffice-design] Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: new
> features  page ...
> > From: [hidden email]
> > To: [hidden email]
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Charles Marcus
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On 2011-01-17 8:39 AM, David Nelson wrote:
> > >> But I see a chance to bring him back into the mainstream of the
> > >> project by encouraging him (and his "Drupal boys") to take a leading
> > >> role in the development of the SilverStripe website as a superb
> > >> communications and marketing tool for Libreoffice and TDF.
> > >
> > > I also think that, if Michael were so inclined, Drupal could initially
> > > serve as the 'support' backend, with its potential for integrating all
> > > of the different support modes (email lists, forums and newsgroups)...
> > > this would give it the opportunity to 'prove' itself (personally, I
> have
> > > no idea if Drupal can even truly achieve this, much less is preferable
> > > over Silverstripe)...
> > >
> > >> I can still be there to play an assistive role in the wings, with
> > >> some great ideas, too. But Michael could take on the main written
> > >> content development role, working in close symbiosis with Christoph
> > >> and Ivan. I feel they will have a close empathy and an excellent
> > >> working relationship.
> > >>
> > >> I feel that this is a novel and creative solution to what could
> > >> otherwise become a conflictual and unproductive situation. We will
> > >> all win. Most important of all, LIBREOFFICE and TDF will win.
> > >>
> > >> What do you think? I am including Michael in this mail, and I want
> > >> to hear his feelings on this.
> > >
> > > I think its a great idea if Michael is willing to take it on...
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Charles
> >
> > Charles,
> > I like the idea, but I think it is worth waiting for the conference
> > call to discuss.
> > This is achievable, however it will take some time setting up and
> > configuring, and in the same time we could have all the same
> > functionality as the existing site on one unified system, allowing us
> > to automatically manage all of the cross links between the systems. We
> > might end up creating a monster that we need to manually manage. I
> > will look into the possibilities prior to the meeting.
> >
> > Again, it is a great idea. I will add it to the agenda for the Conference
> Call.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mike Wheatland
> >
> > --
> > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]<website%[hidden email]>
> > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
> > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]<website%[hidden email]>
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
>
>

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Nino Nino
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

New website conf call agenda (was: Re: new features page ...)

In reply to this post by Wheatbix
Hi,

On Friday 21 January 2011 02:23, Michael Wheatland wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Bernhard Dippold
>
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Please let us keep focused on the work at the moment. When the
> > present site is in a final state, the team has shown how it works
> > and Drupal has lost it's "red rag" meaning to some community
> > members, we can consider all of these possibilities. To keep the
> > proposals in mind, they should be added to the wiki.
> >
> > Does this sound reasonable?
>
> I fully agree with your statement. [...]

Then please drop Agenda items 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 and replace them
by (e.g.)

1 - urgent TODOs for the website team -
    what has to be done in the next few days (before the release)?

2 - collaboration with all the website using teams
    Identify the most important short term stakeholders for the website
    Eventually ask who needs help with setting up website contents

3 - eventually (if really needed) items #2 and #3 from the old agenda
    (what groups/roles does the website team need now for achieving
    goals from topics #1/#2 ?)

4 - if time is left, start to think about mid/long term strategies
    one or two of the most important topics from the old agenda

Thereby you all can show that you are realists and not dreamers.

My 2 cents.

Nino

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Next » 123 « Prev