Am 07/31/2013 02:08 AM, schrieb Ricardo Berlasso:
2013/7/31 Marcus (OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de>
Am 07/28/2013 10:18 PM, schrieb Marcus (OOo):
Am 07/28/2013 09:55 PM, schrieb Dave Fisher:
On Jul 28, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
Am 07/28/2013 06:28 PM, schrieb Dave Fisher:
On Jul 28, 2013, at 5:46 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
Am 07/28/2013 02:18 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Marcus
(OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote:
Am 07/28/2013 01:56 PM, schrieb janI:
On 28 July 2013 13:47, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote:
Am 07/28/2013 12:37 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
On 24/07/2013 Hagar Delest wrote:
Huge thanks for such reactivity indeed.
But a lot of people are missing it due to the "portable"
version being
too hidden in our download infrastructure.
What's the best solution to ensure that:
1) Users can actually find the "portable" version and
2) Users are correctly informed that this is a third-party port?
My proposal (subject to lazy consensus or discussion here)
would be to
modify
http://www.openoffice.org/****download/<http://www.openoffice.org/**download/>
<http://www.**openoffice.org/download/<http://www.openoffice.org/download/>
as follows: add it to the line that says
Get all platforms, languages, language packs | Source Code
tarballs and
SDK |
so that it becomes
Get all platforms, languages, language packs | Source Code
tarballs and
SDK | Third-party and portable versions
and to link the additional text to
http://www.openoffice.org/****porting/<http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/>
<http://www.**openoffice.org/porting/<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/>
so that people are correctly informed. This also ensures that
when/if we
have other portable versions available nothing needs to be
changed.
To have a visible impression see here:
http://ooo-site.staging.**apac**he.org/download/test/**index.**
html<http://apache.org/download/test/**index.html><
http://ooo-site.staging.**apache.org/download/test/**index.html<http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/test/index.html>
+1, is "portings" the right word ? my dictionary suggest
"ports", but I
am
no native speaker.
Hm, my favorite online dictionary says "portings". ;-) Let's see
what our
native speakers will say.
"ports" is more usual in a software context.
But "portable" is ambiguous, since it means two things: 1) capable of
being ported to multiple platforms. 2) something you can carry.
Since we offer portable code, ports of the binaries and a portable
version, it is hard to avoid confusion here ;-)
The link says:
Portable USB version and other third-party portings
I think "Third-party ports including a portable USB version" is
better US English.
and the title:
Get Apache OpenOffice as portable USB version or choose from other
third-party portings
"Get third-party ports of Apache OpenOffice including a portable USB
version."
I want to put the portable thing first as it seems to be the more
important info. So, how to do it in better English?
Link: "Portable USB versions and third-party ports."
Title: "Get Apache OpenOffice software packaged as portable USB
versions and third-party ports."
Thanks, I've corrected the text.
This little change is now also live.
Looks nice! I've tried to implement this on the ES download site but almost
break the page... I'm not on good relations with html (it's all OK, in
fact I ended correcting a typo...). I'll look at this again later.
If you need a helping hand, just give me a mail.
Maybe you should wait a few days until the new webpage(s) have been
settled down a bit with the last mirco fixes - as I can see already the
next requests.
Marcus
Shouldn't this be enough to make it clear? Or is it better when I
replace "Portable USB version" with "Portable USB App"?
If we say App then users will be thinking "App Store".
OK
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
