I know that the "What is OpenOffice.org?" document is nearing completion, but I would personally suggest the following amendments (it looks like a lot, but the changes are few and actually quite minor):
===========================================
>Cross-platform. OOo 2.0 runs on Microsoft Windows, Linux, and Sun Solaris, and is available in over 40 languages.
I think that this part should be slightly modified for two reasons. Firstly, I think that the list of compatible operating systems should at least include all the OSes that have download sections on the OOo download page, which is Windows/Linux/FBSD/Mac. Secondly, the 40 languages part is an important point, but (imo) has nothing to do with the software being cross-platform. I think that language versatility should be moved to a separate point. I think the "Cross-platform" part should read: "Cross-platform. OOo 2.0 runs on many Operating Systems, including Microsoft Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, MacOS X, and Sun Solaris."
> International. OOo is available in over 40 languages.
I think that this point needs its own point; it has nothing to do with being cross-platform (imo), and doesn't really fit into any other section.
> Open source. You can distribute, copy, and modify the software as much as you wish.
I think this section needs slightly modified. If you are technically inclined, and know what the open source movement is about, then the original point will make perfect sense. However, to someone who is not technically inclined, and/or who is not aware of the Open Source licensing scheme or methodology, the original point on its own doesn't necessarily make sense. I think a reference to the source code and license is required here. It should also provide "For more information, see "What is 'open source'?" which would be a bookmark to the appropriate section, so that people are aware that an explanation is available within the document. I think it should read something like: "Open source. As the source code is available, and the license permits modification and derivative works, you can distribute, copy, and modify the software as much as you wish. For more information, see <What is “open source”?>"
>No vendor lock-in. OOo 2.0 uses an XML (Extensible Markup Language) file format developed as an industry standard by OASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards). These files can easily be read by any text editor and their framework is open and published.
Again, this part will make perfect sense to someone who is technically inclined and who will know about open formats in general, but the last part will not necessarily make sense to someone who is unaware of these factors. Additionally, I don't think it's quite accurate to say that it can be easily read by any text editor, since it isn't quite as simple as opening the file in Notepad/GEdit, and being able to make sense of the file. I would suggest that the last line say something like "The framework of these files is open and available to anyone who wishes to implement them. In this way, anyone is able to ensure their applications are able to read and/or write OOo documents."
>For more information on Free and Open Source software, visit these websites:
>Open Source Initiative (OSI): http://www.Opensource.org
>Free Software Foundation (FSF): http://www.gnu.org
Two small things about this part:
1) If one is in italics, then the other should be; if not, neither should.
2) There is no need to capitalise the "O", otherwise it should be OpenSource, and GNU.
I think both should be in italics, and the url should be openoffice.org and gnu.org.
> OpenOffice.org has been translated into over 45 languages from Arabic to Zulu, so your language probably is supported. There are many spelling checkers and thesauri available for languages and dialects that do not have a localized program interface. They are available from the OpenOffice.org website.
In the "Is OpenOffice available in my language?" FAQ section, it mentions that OOo is available in 45 languages, whereas the earlier point about the suite being international mentions "over 40". While both are technically accurate, there should be some consistency in that both should be the same number. I think since the former is more specific, the latter should be updated to match the 45 count.
===========================================
I am still new to the list/group, so some of this stuff may have been discussed before, so forgive me if I am rehashing old debates. I do think that those changes are quite small but important, to make the document more accessible to non-technical people, and to generally ensure continuity.
Comments?
