[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
The point here is that OOo has a small installer with 140Mb (no Java, and only English, Spanish and French dictionaries). Why is LO going in the opposite direction with 299 and 466Mb??? The current packages (including in the smallest option 56 language packs!!!) makes no sense IMO as I mentioned in this post http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-tp1954148p1973749.html I think that an English only version of LibreOffice and then separate Language Packs (10-40Mb) which include the translation for the interface and dictionaries, spelling, etc is the best option. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-tp1954148p1991949.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] the status bar
Hi, At 10:50 30/11/2010, Sigrid Carrera wrote: Hi, 2010/11/30 Jih-Yao Lin jih...@gmail.com what is the WW8Num3 below the writer? I'm not sure what you're talking about. Which number below Writer? At which position is it in the status bar? In my status bar is the following (from left to right): Field with page numbers - style (default) - language (German) - INSRT (or Overwrite)- STD (marking of text) - Notifier about my document being changed - Notifier about digital signature - selector for how to display pages - zoom selector (with a slide) - zoom selector (numerical value). WW8Num3 seems to be a list style; you can find it in the Styles and Formatting widget when you click the button for List Styles (i.e. the button at the top, not the item List Styles in the menu at the bottom). When you use it, you will see WW8Num3 in the status bar: in OpenOffice.org Writer it will be in the field between Digital Signature and the selector for how to display pages. Best regards, Christophe Is it normal in writer? I'd say my above list is pretty normal for Writer. Can you describe, where you have something different? I am using LO in chinese. I am using LibO in English. Sigrid -- Christophe Strobbe K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD Research Group on Document Architectures Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442 B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee BELGIUM tel: +32 16 32 85 51 http://www.docarch.be/ Twitter: @RabelaisA11y --- Better products and services through end-user empowerment www.usem-net.eu - www.stand4all.eu --- Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other social networks. You may have agreed to their privacy policy, but I haven't. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
On 2010-11-30 5:43 AM, plino wrote: The point here is that OOo has a small installer with 140Mb (no Java, and only English, Spanish and French dictionaries). Why is LO going in the opposite direction with 299 and 466Mb??? The current packages (including in the smallest option 56 language packs!!!) makes no sense IMO as I mentioned in this post http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-tp1954148p1973749.html This has already been discussed, and it was stated that smaller more targeted installers will definitely happen, but right now disk space is the reason for a single large installer... Once more space is available, more download options will be made available... or at least thats the way I understood it... -- Best regards, Charles -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
On 11/30/2010 05:43 AM, plino wrote: The point here is that OOo has a small installer with 140Mb (no Java, and only English, Spanish and French dictionaries). Why is LO going in the opposite direction with 299 and 466Mb??? The current packages (including in the smallest option 56 language packs!!!) makes no sense IMO as I mentioned in this post http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-tp1954148p1973749.html I think that an English only version of LibreOffice and then separate Language Packs (10-40Mb) which include the translation for the interface and dictionaries, spelling, etc is the best option. I agree. -- Thanks for your time, Nathan Heafner -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
How come other language packs aren't being offered separately from the main English installer? That way sizes are kept down in regards to downloading. I'm willing to set aside some space on my server to help out in that respect if need be for the language packs or otherwise. On 11/30/2010 05:39 PM, Nathan wrote: On 11/30/2010 05:43 AM, plino wrote: The point here is that OOo has a small installer with 140Mb (no Java, and only English, Spanish and French dictionaries). Why is LO going in the opposite direction with 299 and 466Mb??? The current packages (including in the smallest option 56 language packs!!!) makes no sense IMO as I mentioned in this post http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-tp1954148p1973749.html I think that an English only version of LibreOffice and then separate Language Packs (10-40Mb) which include the translation for the interface and dictionaries, spelling, etc is the best option. I agree. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
NoOp wrote: On 11/26/2010 12:16 PM, Robert Derman wrote: Marc Paré wrote: ... Of these two options, I would prefer being offered the menu AFTER having downloaded the LO suite. The reason for this: some users may find that downloading the suite took a longer than the anticipated time and they would not have enough time/patience to download the additional items.On the other hand, if the LO suite had taken less anticipated time to download, the user may feel it right to download the extra items. Marc Here I really must disagree, I think pretty much everyone knows what sort of internet connection they have, and therefore if the downloadable packages are plainly labeled as to size in megabytes, (which they certainly should be) then they would know what sort of download time is involved. The only real variable here being if the download server is overloaded, and if you watch your download speeds you will know if that is the case. This is not targeted at Robert, but to all suggesting that bundled documentation downloads be considered. Keep in mind that one of the targets for OOo/LO et al is locations/countries/users that cannot, or do not, wish to pay for MS Office. Many of those are still on dialup (even in the USA). Its difficult to really offer any meaningful suggestions until we get beyond the beta stage but once we do, we should really do a better job than OOo ever did of making LO available on disk for all those people with only dial-up or no internet connection at all. I understand that right now due to a lack of server space the current download package is FAR too large. That problem will of course have to be solved. Once there is enough server space, we should offer a choice of download packages, as I have mentioned in previous emails. I know that virtually all computers made in the last few years have had DVD as opposed to CD optical drives installed. Actually I think it is 5-6 years now. What I am getting at with this is that the LO disk could be a DVD disk rather than a CD disk. Or at least it could be available on both kinds of disk. Anyway, the cost of DVD blanks is not significantly more than CD blanks, and a DVD would offer more than enough space for everything TDF has to offer. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Responsible FreeDesktop Bugzilla
Hi, can we find a volunteer with some Bugzilla knowledge who will get permission for adding new versions and similar? For details please see https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31783! Regards Rainer -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
Le 2010-11-30 13:44, Robert Derman a écrit : Its difficult to really offer any meaningful suggestions until we get beyond the beta stage but once we do, we should really do a better job than OOo ever did of making LO available on disk for all those people with only dial-up or no internet connection at all. I understand that right now due to a lack of server space the current download package is FAR too large. That problem will of course have to be solved. Once there is enough server space, we should offer a choice of download packages, as I have mentioned in previous emails. I know that virtually all computers made in the last few years have had DVD as opposed to CD optical drives installed. Actually I think it is 5-6 years now. What I am getting at with this is that the LO disk could be a DVD disk rather than a CD disk. Or at least it could be available on both kinds of disk. Anyway, the cost of DVD blanks is not significantly more than CD blanks, and a DVD would offer more than enough space for everything TDF has to offer. The trend is to actually no longer offer a CD or DVD drive. The DVD drives are also slowly disappearing. I was a whitebox dealer for a while and my stock whiteboxes were not sold with DVD drives. These were sold as extras. However, this does not in any way help our dial-up modem membership. Our communities should help out in creating disk in their localities to help this group. Marc -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] A better idea for a download package.
On 2010-11-30 2:16 PM, Kevin Vermeer wrote: Perhaps the installer could be replaced by a small configuration application, which would allow the user to select the components they wish to install, and would then download the selected components? This is fast becoming an FAQ... LibO - like OOo - does not really have separate components. Even if you could download just one component, the resulting size would only be a few MBs smaller than it is now. Componentizing it is such a huge job that it is really not worth discussing here. The current size problem as compared to OOo is because all of the language packs are included... and this situation is only temporary until storage is no longer an issue... Patience... -- Best regards, Charles -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] the status bar
2010/11/30 Christophe Strobbe christophe.stro...@esat.kuleuven.be: WW8Num3 seems to be a list style; you can find it in the Styles and Formatting widget when you click the button for List Styles (i.e. the button at the top, not the item List Styles in the menu at the bottom). When you use it, you will see WW8Num3 in the status bar: in OpenOffice.org Writer it will be in the field between Digital Signature and the selector for how to display pages. In fact. Styles with names WW8something means the document was imported from Word and those styles were automatically generated. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:10 PM, leif leiflod...@gmail.com wrote: Den 30-11-2010 11:43, plino skrev: The point here is that OOo has a small installer with 140Mb (no Java, and only English, Spanish and French dictionaries). Why is LO going in the opposite direction with 299 and 466Mb??? Agree. This is a problem I think that an English only version of LibreOffice and then separate Language Packs (10-40Mb) which include the translation for the interface and dictionaries, spelling, etc is the best option. No no no no no no! If you think all people on this planet are native English speaking you are wrong. Please. We have discussed this so many times that I don't believe we still are. English installer + native lang-pack is a no-go! Nobody said that everyone is native English speaking. I promise you that you speak English orders of magnitude better than I speak whatever your native language is. The problem is that there is a core of functionality that all languages can use, along with the need for application language localized to users - the more the merrier. English has become the lingua franca of the Web, whatever the cause and whatever the effect. If LibO ships in one language with optional language packs, then what language do you suggest? If LibO ships in all possible languages, then what do you suggest for people on a 56kbps connection? LibreOffice is an international project - not an English one that happens to be translated. /Leif Lodahl Representing 500.000 users who are *not* native English perhaps representing far fewer than that. You are probably not representing people who have no problem getting a fine program in whatever language along with a language packs in their own language. It's gonna be a challenge getting liftoff with the basic LibreOffice capability. Why take on changing a fundamental aspect of the Web in addition? IMO, this attitude will result in no LibreOffice and English still spoken on the Web. Carl -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
a bit off-topic (was: Re: [tdf-discuss] accessibility mailing list)
Hi Christophe, hi Jonathon! Am Dienstag, den 30.11.2010, 11:42 +0100 schrieb Christophe Strobbe: Hi, At 18:13 29/11/2010, jonathon wrote: On 11/29/2010 02:14 PM, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote: (...) It's only solution is to get Your tools and Your communication partners help You achieving that task. LibO intrinsically fails Section 508 criteria. Given how low that bar is, I suspect that any country whose a11y legislation has any merit, should automatically disqualify LibO from consideration. Mmh, why do we fail? At least for OOo, I'm sure that we complied to the requirements, since OOo was used within the US administration. So what is missing for LibO? The USA are ahead of most other countries (including much of Europe) with regard to accessibility legislation. (The EU wants to create a standard for accesibility requirements for ICT in public procurement, but I don't expect a final standard before 2012.) Good thing :-) This can be shurely be demanded by someone willing tho help development. Someone looking for advice is a completely different story and should be handled as such. When it comes to a11y, the first step is to learn if the program works with the software that sort of succeeds in providing the data they need, so that the program can almost be used. Just to make sure that we are all on the same page: people with disabilities do not always use assistive technology. Sometimes it is just a matter of setting high contrast and bigger font size in the OS, which any app should than inherit. For others, keyboard access is essential. Well said! And to Jonathan - for the majority of our users, the current UI has major drawbacks (e.g. numerous unnecessary modal dialogs, minor intelligence in toolbars, plain controls, ...). But for people requiring assistive technology, this is pretty helpful - our UI is made of very simple elements that can be addressed easily In addition: older people can also benefit from accessibility features software, but they don't want to be considered as people with disabilities? (Decreased vision? That's just part of getting old, dear.) Correct! And to emphasize that - what does older mean today? Given the demographical change and the today's life expectancy, it is just a matter of fact that any kind of technology has to support broad target groups. Skipping the infamous mistakes that some people started to develop things that even looked like being made for old people, today we are back on track with design for all (but I still wonder why we need such slogans for things that should be common sense ...). Looking at the content of my mail, I should say my 2 ct. Cheers, Christoph -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.
You are right. I didn't express myself correctly. This is what I'm suggesting http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-tp1954148p1973749.html the first screen for the installer is simply a language selector (such as the pidgin installer, and many others) so that the installer itself runs in the user's language BTW I'm Portuguese :) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/A-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-LibreOffice-tp1954148p1995615.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] A better idea for a download package.
- Original Message From: Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.com On 2010-11-30 2:16 PM, Kevin Vermeer wrote: Perhaps the installer could be replaced by a small configuration application, which would allow the user to select the components they wish to install, and would then download the selected components? This is fast becoming an FAQ... LibO - like OOo - does not really have separate components. Even if you could download just one component, the resulting size would only be a few MBs smaller than it is now. While that may currently be the case - that is absolutely ridiculous. TDF/LO should make a priority of resolving that issue. Componentizing it is such a huge job that it is really not worth discussing here. It will most certainly be worth it as things will get easier to maintain (code-wise). It will also allow for better installation flexibility. It also has nothing to do with the software being seamlessly integrated. I understand that StarOffice was once one big integrated application - I used SO5/6 at one point under the free license before OOo exited. However, that doesn't mean that everything needs to depend on everything else. Having such a complex code structure will simply push developers away - yes, I did look at modifying OOo at one point (a few years ago), only I was unable to figure out where to even start due to code structure and organization. (I do hope to try again at some point when I get the chance.) Having created installers before - namely MSI's - there should ultimately be no reason why the installer should be broken down as: - core LO libraries used by each package - package for each app (writer, calc, etc.) - separate language packages for documentation and language bindings - extensions clip art can be added as additional packages of varying sizes (e.g. most popular, top 100, etc.) In MSI terms each of the above would be an MSI Merge Module, with each installer just being a conglomerate of Merge Modules for all the pieces and the necessary glue. Many open source projects - TortoiseSVN, Pidgin IM, Gtk, KDE SC, to name a few - already do this kind of thing too; and commercial software highly utilizes such mechanisms to tailor installs to different customer groups. KDE on Windows (windows.kde.org) even provides an installer that downloads over the Internet the required parts for the install - not saying that's how we should go about. But you definitely need to target things a bit differently to capture more people groups - in terms of language, and network connectivity. As an organization, TDF should look at selling USB sticks, CDs, and DVDs on-line for those without Internet or extremely slow downloads - a good way to raise some money to support the organization with too. (Yeah, volume probably won't be very high; though if planned out well, it could even be put into on-line and brick mortar stores too - though I'd just offer on-line to start and provide a contact page for distributors that want to carry it.) A LO/Writer installer should just be the necessary parts for LO/Writer. Same for an LO/Calc installer. Documentation and additional language packages could be supplemental downloads. The current size problem as compared to OOo is because all of the language packs are included... and this situation is only temporary until storage is no longer an issue... Patience, I'll agree - but a real solution is necessary. Ben -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-marketing] missing tomorrow's marketing call
Hi Florian! I'm sorry as well ... since my day job is kind of insane at the moment (the amount of things to do, not the job itself *g*), I'm unable to say that I will be available that time. Thus, may anybody else be able to host the call? Am Dienstag, den 30.11.2010, 20:26 +0100 schrieb Florian Effenberger: Hi, I'm sorry to say, but I totally overlooked that I'm out tomorrow evening on a family birthday party, so I most likely will not be able to make it to the marketing confcall :-( Please enjoy the party ... send pictures of delicious cake :-) Cheers, Christoph -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Responsible FreeDesktop Bugzilla
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 20:02 +0100, Rainer Bielefeld wrote: Hi, can we find a volunteer with some Bugzilla knowledge who will get permission for adding new versions and similar? For details please see https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31783! Regards Hello Rainer Just getting a chance to check mails, I see you volunteered yourself today- however if you are still looking for someone to help here I'm happy to pitch in. No experience with bugzilla but I'm a pretty quick study usually. Best wishes, Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
