Hi Robert, *


On Wednesday, April 27, 2005, at 8:20 PM GMT +0200, Robert Vojta wrote:

[snip]

Let's presume  that we need and want a site not on OOo that provides
information about OOo.  Call it, "official" information, though I think
that may be a limiting factor.


My concern, as I expressed before, was that I thought we already had
sites within OOo that did this.  Having one outside of OOo raises a few
logistical problems, but those can probably be solved in practice.
So...


>  This site should be small, fast and this site should contains few
>  pages about:
>
>   o why the user should use OO.o

Okay.

>
>   o FAQ

Okay; I'd wonder which?  Right now we have difficulty organizing our
user FAQ--and with Jonathon's KB, it may get even more fun. Mind, I
object to duplication but am not a maniac about that. I just think it's
easier to control misinformation if there are limited objects to worry
about updating.
>
>   o other users experience

Not sure what you mean and whether these would replace or complement the
Testimonials, case studies, etc.  Would they?  And, why should users go
to spreadooo and not OOo proper?  What, in short, makes spreadooo
better?  

I'll answer that question: it's because spreadooo might have a more
interactive environment. But users nowadays for OOo need only use email;
the shortcoming is in editing the responses, and I'd imagine spreadooo
would have that same problem.


>
>   o links to all articles from newspapers and online media

I was in discussion with Deepankar about something like this. I am for
having some sort of easy to manage news list for such media and one
could link to it from OOo; no problem for me there. Management, etc.,
would of course be the same problem as now.
>
>   o how to switch from Microsoft Office

Right now, we have migration stories and guides; I can see how they may
be on spreadooo--but that then raises the question: why should they be
on spreadooo and not on OOo? OOo again was and is conceived with the
notion of being the place for such information, unless, and I suppose
this is what I want to determine, you see OOo as being a development
space and spreadooo as being an evangelical/marketing space? In that
case, how, again, is spreadooo not just replacing MP?

>
>   o buttons and HTML codes how to propagate OpenOffice.org
>     http://firefox.czilla.cz/propagace/

how is this not already contained by the art project?

>
>   o download stuff

No, I think not, unless you mean material that adds only to a user's
experience, such as add ons, plugins, clipart, etc.  If so, then that
makes sense: we need a coherent location for such things.

>
>  Very good example of this site is located here:
>
>   o http://firefox.czilla.cz/

But you miss the point. OOo has been created from the begining with the
notion of being flexible and accommodating to marketing interests
throughout the world; that's one of the points of the NLC.  I fail to
see then how spreadooo does what OOo does better. It seems rather just
to do what OOo does already.  I can see how some elements (add on site,
news site) would be good.  
>
>  I know, it's in Czech, but you can see that this site contains few
>  pages and the most important info about Firefox. This site
>  should be created for newcomers only - come and learn basic facts
>  about OpenOffice.org, read answers to FAQ, read others experience,
>  media comments, learn how to switch from MS Office, see where to
>  download and finally, how to help with propagation. That's all,
>  nothing more, nothing less (no forums, no colaboration corners,
>  ...). Simple and effective promotion.
>
How doesn't OOo do this now? 

There are some ways we can consider changing OOo now, you know. 

* integrate with a non-SourceCast server that would offer more LAMP
tools and any other apps needed and be managed by the community.  

* promote more regional sites

* stipulate standard copy guidelines for promotion--nothing onerous,
just the obvious, like suggestions of what to say about OOo, whom to
contact, things like  that.




>  You can say that we have www.OpenOffice.org site. I know, but this
>  is too complicated for newcomers and you have to spend lot of time
>  when you're searching info mentioned in the previous paragraph.

That can be changed.  Right now, Matthew Waldrop is redesigning the
support page. It can be made to better address OOo user needs. We can
also have fun creating a general page in MP that provides all the above
(minus the add ons but with links to them).  What this entails is
putting the links in one place, really.

So, if the objection to OOo, which is well known, is that it requires
people to search and is complicated, then address that problem first,
rather than going off and starting a potentially divisive project.  

if you want it regional, fine: NLC groups are already doing that, of
course.  More support may make sense.

Why don't you draft a page of what you would want?
>
>  It looks like that the best way is to place this site at
>  www.OpenOffice.org. I was thinking about this little bit and now,
>  I think it's not good idea. With this change you can brake - links,
>  bookmarks, ... and the 'static' front page can discourage people
>  from future visiting ...

Not sure what you mean, exactly; you meant on OOo homepage? then you are
right. But we have the "new users" page and we have rather flexible
other pages.

[snip]

>
>  I think that we have missing this site. Then, promotion site will be
>  for newcomers and the *.openoffice.org will be for more experienced
>  users and programmers.

I see perfectly what you mean and had a notion siimllar to this in 2002,
when we released 1.0. I felt that OOo could be split between developers
and users, with users having a site not unlke what you are suggesting; I
went so far as to draft a fairly detailed plan for it and presented a
rough version to project_leads and some others, I seem to recall.  But
I'm not sure I think that way any longer.  Making the division is rather
difficult, for one, and more important, users and non-developer
contributors (where do they stand?) help with OOo's momentum.  That is
one reason I get nervous thinking of sites that logically do much of
what we do now on OOo.

But I can see the advantage of complementing OOo with a site that offers
users of OOo things like a knowledge base, information on migration,
documents, add ons, clipart, and other user goodies, while integrating
with existing OOo development projects so that there is not competition
and pointless duplication.  Kind of like what you suggest but with some
modifications.





>
>  This is my whole idea with more details, hope, it's clear now.

Thanks
>
>Regards,
>Robert



Best,
Louis



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to