Hello Bernhard, Cor,
I have focused the first headline on that it's free and has been created
for everybody.
I have added info about the file format, many languages and platforms
under tha last headline.
The Read more links provide a flap function that displays the longer
version of each headline. It is not the correct implementation to do it
(for users without javascript). That'll be fixed later.
I added links to the features page.
By the way, isn't "dev_docs" a bad URL for this key page?
http://www.openoffice.org/dev_docs/features/3.1/index.html
What's wrong with this URL? :-)
http://www.openoffice.org/features/3.1/
Do we need it to be under dev_docs that looks like a place for drafts? :-)
I know it's our folder for development related documents. But think
about the URL as they are very important and well displayed to the user.
I would move this document.
I added system requirements and release notes, as it looks very nice to
have it at hand. It's the least important information though, that's why
i placed it last. But business users might be interested in these links.
I have also designed it a little bit, but most design work is still left.
I will work on the page today and the next couple of days.
Feel free to comment on this work.
Per
Bernhard Dippold skrev:
Hi Per, all,
Per Eriksson wrote:
John McCreesh skrev:
On Mon, July 13, 2009 19:03, Per Eriksson wrote:
[snip]
I would start an effort to make the why site much simpler. More like a
guide. If you are a specific role this is covered on different more
in-depth pages.
John, I'd be happy to provide a sketch with my ideas for the why site.
Go for it. [...]
http://erinet.se/why/
Okay here is my quick outline. [...]
I like it (and support Andy's point about "coolness").
But I'm not quite sure if the four points mentioned (and the ranking
among them) will be the most attractive reasons for not yet convinced
new users for OpenOffice.org.
What about
"Future proof file format" or something like that?
Are new features really our top-level reason to use OOo?
For me personally the existing features, covering all necessary tasks,
are more important.
The second point would be extensions, after that new features.
Then security, file format and openness.
But these are just my personal thoughts - not necessarily more
valuable than any other ...
Best regards
Bernhard
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
