Re: Submission for consultants page
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Drew Jensen drewjensen.in...@gmail.com wrote: Howdy Rob, Ah trademarks - yes, I agree the Apache OpenOffice should have a TM, a la: IBM® Lotus® Symphony™ is a suite of open source office applications. I've put in a request to get that page updated. Just to close this out, I can see that the page has now been updated: http://www-03.ibm.com/software/products/en/ibm-support-for-apache-openoffice Regards, -Rob A couple of quick questions if I may. Will the support only be available to those with the IBM connectors? IIRC that was the plan in the past. It is certainly possible to combine IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice along with a license for IBM Connections or SmartCloud. In that case our Connector [1] would be supported as well. We also have an integration solution for OpenOffice and IBM Enterprise Content Management [2]. We're exploring other integrations as well. That said, if a customer wants help with a large, complex, standalone deployment of Apache OpenOffice, we'll talk with them. That was also the case with Symphony. Also, does IBM have any plans to list AOO support on the United States GSA registry? This was available in the past but not available for the last few years. I have no idea. Should we? Regards, -Rob [1] http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/ibm-connections-connector-apache-openoffice [2] http://www-01.ibm.com/software/data/information-agenda/catalog/profiles/OpenOffice_Integration_IBM_ECM.html Thanks, //drew On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] Sorry, but I think the website does not comply with the necessary formalities. Always has been emphasized, these are marked on the relevant websites trademark of Apache, for example: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice TM and not only: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice I think that would be more confusing. Sorry, but appearance is imho not so much the issue here, but rather trademark rights of Apache. Yes, that is formal, but how else should this be handled? It would suggest the entire name was a trademark since it is a continuous name with capital letters. It does not have to be in the headline. Put identification in continuous text, for example in: IBM® Support for Apache OpenOffice™ offers expert technical support for Apache OpenOffice™, ... where IBM is already marked with ®. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: I have no idea. Should we? Sorry for the delay. Well, it rather depends on what you are trying to do - I doubt that in this instance it would make much sense. Anyhow, it is rather a different subject from the listing itself, and on that note (the listing) I did not mean to say I had objection. Change of Subject - I note, or so it appears, that Symphony is no longer available or at least not for download. There where a few ancillary artifacts, some key board shortcut sheets and a few small tutorials which had been available from the old Symphony site and seems to have no links to the newer web page - any chance you employer would allow someone to update those for AOO 4 and make them available on the wiki here? [perhaps I should of broken that into a separate thread] Thanks for all your work, //drew
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Drew Jensen drewjensen.in...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: I have no idea. Should we? Sorry for the delay. Well, it rather depends on what you are trying to do - I doubt that in this instance it would make much sense. Anyhow, it is rather a different subject from the listing itself, and on that note (the listing) I did not mean to say I had objection. Change of Subject - I note, or so it appears, that Symphony is no longer available or at least not for download. There where a few ancillary artifacts, some key board shortcut sheets and a few small tutorials which had been available from the old Symphony site and seems to have no links to the newer web page - any chance you employer would allow someone to update those for AOO 4 and make them available on the wiki here? [perhaps I should of broken that into a separate thread] Did you see the stuff that was already contributed? Look inside: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/symphony/trunk/help/com.ibm.symphony.help.en/doc.zip -Rob Thanks for all your work, //drew - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
Drat - I'm so far behind *laughing*.. The answer is no. I did just download it however and will look when I get home. Thanks again On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Drew Jensen drewjensen.in...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: I have no idea. Should we? Sorry for the delay. Well, it rather depends on what you are trying to do - I doubt that in this instance it would make much sense. Anyhow, it is rather a different subject from the listing itself, and on that note (the listing) I did not mean to say I had objection. Change of Subject - I note, or so it appears, that Symphony is no longer available or at least not for download. There where a few ancillary artifacts, some key board shortcut sheets and a few small tutorials which had been available from the old Symphony site and seems to have no links to the newer web page - any chance you employer would allow someone to update those for AOO 4 and make them available on the wiki here? [perhaps I should of broken that into a separate thread] Did you see the stuff that was already contributed? Look inside: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/symphony/trunk/help/com.ibm.symphony.help.en/doc.zip -Rob Thanks for all your work, //drew - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: Hello *, From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] So...this thread does not meet lazy consensus but are we ready to implement this addition, without further changes, anyway? I'll be happy to take care of this either later today or tomorrow if we are. Can you please summarize what the solution should look like? The thread is long and I have somewhat lost track as point # 4 should be changed. Should he ever be changed or what says: ... Can be eased a bit as it is clear enough did the Items are with and for our project, respectively. product. In particular, it would be important for me to know whether I can change my website (http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html) or must. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org My take on this discussion so far (and I am certainly NOT the definitive judge on this): * there is the listing on the consultants page itself: http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html I wrote that page, so it might not be too presumptuous if I say what I meant when I wrote it ;-) The guideline is that the 3rd party pages must respect ASF Trademarks. This is vague, but intentionally so. I think we'll all be more accurate judges of what is wrong when we see it than we are predictors of all things that could possibly be wrong. So the discretion is given to the PMC to take this on a case-by-case basis. We should be looking at each submission and their linked websites as a whole. The kinds of abuses I had in mind were mainly pages that implied that the services were endorsed or affiliated with the ASF. This is much more than technicalities of whether or not a (TM) symbol is used. For example, a page that calls itself Apache OpenOffice (TM) Consulting Group would *not* be OK. We don't want our trademarks used as adjectives, since that suggests an affiliation. I also had in mind that we might need to correct names where they are misstated, e.g., Apache Open Office, Apache Openoffice, OpenOffice.org, etc. Regards, -Rob OK -- I think we should go ahead with this. Unfortunately, testing with my private web area on my box, my server is balking at the .xsl page that goes with this...so... The command line should look something like: xsltproc -o consultants.html --stringparam locale en to-html.xsl consultants.xml You can switch locales by setting different values via stringparam parameter. Other XSLT engines should work, but the command line would be different. ok, that's not what I was using...this seems to work and not complain about the stylesheet being invalid. Rob, since you have always taken care of this in the past, I would be fine and dandy with you committing this change -- wearing your Apache hat instead of your IBM one of course. ;) Sure, I can do it next week when I am at my desk. Regards, -Rob Anyway, I was just about to do this when I see that there is no contact info -- e-mail, phone etc. -- supplied with this listing as with the others. I see there's a phone number supplied on the website, so maybe just include that? If you include the phone number you would also want to include the priority code that is on the webpage. Or don't have a phone number. -Rob So sorry about this -- I guess it's time for more of us to give this area a bit more attention. concerning the actual content we are discussing. This does not have a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice. I thought this was the original cause of objection. And, we can see from the listings on the consultants page that we did not enforce a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice on the consultants page. * there are the actual websites of the consultants, like yours, and this submitted one up for consideration. It seems there is more concern to enforce a (TM) symbol after Apache OpenOffice for these third party websites. However, this is not something required by Apache. See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#attribution The important factor is referencing OpenOffice as Apache OpenOffice, and not the use the of the (TM) after the name. The website, http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html, seems to have all
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 1:00 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: Hello *, From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] So...this thread does not meet lazy consensus but are we ready to implement this addition, without further changes, anyway? I'll be happy to take care of this either later today or tomorrow if we are. Can you please summarize what the solution should look like? The thread is long and I have somewhat lost track as point # 4 should be changed. Should he ever be changed or what says: ... Can be eased a bit as it is clear enough did the Items are with and for our project, respectively. product. In particular, it would be important for me to know whether I can change my website (http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html) or must. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org My take on this discussion so far (and I am certainly NOT the definitive judge on this): * there is the listing on the consultants page itself: http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html I wrote that page, so it might not be too presumptuous if I say what I meant when I wrote it ;-) The guideline is that the 3rd party pages must respect ASF Trademarks. This is vague, but intentionally so. I think we'll all be more accurate judges of what is wrong when we see it than we are predictors of all things that could possibly be wrong. So the discretion is given to the PMC to take this on a case-by-case basis. We should be looking at each submission and their linked websites as a whole. The kinds of abuses I had in mind were mainly pages that implied that the services were endorsed or affiliated with the ASF. This is much more than technicalities of whether or not a (TM) symbol is used. For example, a page that calls itself Apache OpenOffice (TM) Consulting Group would *not* be OK. We don't want our trademarks used as adjectives, since that suggests an affiliation. I also had in mind that we might need to correct names where they are misstated, e.g., Apache Open Office, Apache Openoffice, OpenOffice.org, etc. Regards, -Rob OK -- I think we should go ahead with this. Unfortunately, testing with my private web area on my box, my server is balking at the .xsl page that goes with this...so... The command line should look something like: xsltproc -o consultants.html --stringparam locale en to-html.xsl consultants.xml You can switch locales by setting different values via stringparam parameter. Other XSLT engines should work, but the command line would be different. ok, that's not what I was using...this seems to work and not complain about the stylesheet being invalid. Rob, since you have always taken care of this in the past, I would be fine and dandy with you committing this change -- wearing your Apache hat instead of your IBM one of course. ;) Sure, I can do it next week when I am at my desk. Regards, -Rob Anyway, I was just about to do this when I see that there is no contact info -- e-mail, phone etc. -- supplied with this listing as with the others. I see there's a phone number supplied on the website, so maybe just include that? If you include the phone number you would also want to include the priority code that is on the webpage. Or don't have a phone number. -Rob I felt odd about suggesting this at all -- but it just looked a bit out of place with the other listings we have without some contact information. So, with your OK, I will add the phone number and priority code and get on with this. Of course, it can always be changed. So sorry about this -- I guess it's time for more of us to give this area a bit more attention. concerning the actual content we are discussing. This does not have a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice. I thought this was the original cause of objection. And, we can see from the listings on the consultants page that we did not enforce a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice on the consultants page. * there are the actual websites of the consultants, like yours,
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: Hello *, From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] So...this thread does not meet lazy consensus but are we ready to implement this addition, without further changes, anyway? I'll be happy to take care of this either later today or tomorrow if we are. Can you please summarize what the solution should look like? The thread is long and I have somewhat lost track as point # 4 should be changed. Should he ever be changed or what says: ... Can be eased a bit as it is clear enough did the Items are with and for our project, respectively. product. In particular, it would be important for me to know whether I can change my website (http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html) or must. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org My take on this discussion so far (and I am certainly NOT the definitive judge on this): * there is the listing on the consultants page itself: http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html I wrote that page, so it might not be too presumptuous if I say what I meant when I wrote it ;-) The guideline is that the 3rd party pages must respect ASF Trademarks. This is vague, but intentionally so. I think we'll all be more accurate judges of what is wrong when we see it than we are predictors of all things that could possibly be wrong. So the discretion is given to the PMC to take this on a case-by-case basis. We should be looking at each submission and their linked websites as a whole. The kinds of abuses I had in mind were mainly pages that implied that the services were endorsed or affiliated with the ASF. This is much more than technicalities of whether or not a (TM) symbol is used. For example, a page that calls itself Apache OpenOffice (TM) Consulting Group would *not* be OK. We don't want our trademarks used as adjectives, since that suggests an affiliation. I also had in mind that we might need to correct names where they are misstated, e.g., Apache Open Office, Apache Openoffice, OpenOffice.org, etc. Regards, -Rob OK -- I think we should go ahead with this. Unfortunately, testing with my private web area on my box, my server is balking at the .xsl page that goes with this...so... The command line should look something like: xsltproc -o consultants.html --stringparam locale en to-html.xsl consultants.xml You can switch locales by setting different values via stringparam parameter. Other XSLT engines should work, but the command line would be different. ok, that's not what I was using...this seems to work and not complain about the stylesheet being invalid. Rob, since you have always taken care of this in the past, I would be fine and dandy with you committing this change -- wearing your Apache hat instead of your IBM one of course. ;) Sure, I can do it next week when I am at my desk. Regards, -Rob Anyway, I was just about to do this when I see that there is no contact info -- e-mail, phone etc. -- supplied with this listing as with the others. I see there's a phone number supplied on the website, so maybe just include that? So sorry about this -- I guess it's time for more of us to give this area a bit more attention. concerning the actual content we are discussing. This does not have a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice. I thought this was the original cause of objection. And, we can see from the listings on the consultants page that we did not enforce a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice on the consultants page. * there are the actual websites of the consultants, like yours, and this submitted one up for consideration. It seems there is more concern to enforce a (TM) symbol after Apache OpenOffice for these third party websites. However, this is not something required by Apache. See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#attribution The important factor is referencing OpenOffice as Apache OpenOffice, and not the use the of the (TM) after the name. The website, http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html, seems to have all bases covered near as I can tell -- correct naming and use of (TM). -- - MzK “Unless someone like you
Re: Submission for consultants page
Hello *, From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] So...this thread does not meet lazy consensus but are we ready to implement this addition, without further changes, anyway? I'll be happy to take care of this either later today or tomorrow if we are. Can you please summarize what the solution should look like? The thread is long and I have somewhat lost track as point # 4 should be changed. Should he ever be changed or what says: ... Can be eased a bit as it is clear enough did the Items are with and for our project, respectively. product. In particular, it would be important for me to know whether I can change my website (http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html) or must. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: Hello *, From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] So...this thread does not meet lazy consensus but are we ready to implement this addition, without further changes, anyway? I'll be happy to take care of this either later today or tomorrow if we are. Can you please summarize what the solution should look like? The thread is long and I have somewhat lost track as point # 4 should be changed. Should he ever be changed or what says: ... Can be eased a bit as it is clear enough did the Items are with and for our project, respectively. product. In particular, it would be important for me to know whether I can change my website (http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html) or must. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org My take on this discussion so far (and I am certainly NOT the definitive judge on this): * there is the listing on the consultants page itself: http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html concerning the actual content we are discussing. This does not have a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice. I thought this was the original cause of objection. And, we can see from the listings on the consultants page that we did not enforce a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice on the consultants page. * there are the actual websites of the consultants, like yours, and this submitted one up for consideration. It seems there is more concern to enforce a (TM) symbol after Apache OpenOffice for these third party websites. However, this is not something required by Apache. See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#attribution The important factor is referencing OpenOffice as Apache OpenOffice, and not the use the of the (TM) after the name. The website, http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html, seems to have all bases covered near as I can tell -- correct naming and use of (TM). -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: Hello *, From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] So...this thread does not meet lazy consensus but are we ready to implement this addition, without further changes, anyway? I'll be happy to take care of this either later today or tomorrow if we are. Can you please summarize what the solution should look like? The thread is long and I have somewhat lost track as point # 4 should be changed. Should he ever be changed or what says: ... Can be eased a bit as it is clear enough did the Items are with and for our project, respectively. product. In particular, it would be important for me to know whether I can change my website (http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html) or must. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org My take on this discussion so far (and I am certainly NOT the definitive judge on this): * there is the listing on the consultants page itself: http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html I wrote that page, so it might not be too presumptuous if I say what I meant when I wrote it ;-) The guideline is that the 3rd party pages must respect ASF Trademarks. This is vague, but intentionally so. I think we'll all be more accurate judges of what is wrong when we see it than we are predictors of all things that could possibly be wrong. So the discretion is given to the PMC to take this on a case-by-case basis. We should be looking at each submission and their linked websites as a whole. The kinds of abuses I had in mind were mainly pages that implied that the services were endorsed or affiliated with the ASF. This is much more than technicalities of whether or not a (TM) symbol is used. For example, a page that calls itself Apache OpenOffice (TM) Consulting Group would *not* be OK. We don't want our trademarks used as adjectives, since that suggests an affiliation. I also had in mind that we might need to correct names where they are misstated, e.g., Apache Open Office, Apache Openoffice, OpenOffice.org, etc. Regards, -Rob concerning the actual content we are discussing. This does not have a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice. I thought this was the original cause of objection. And, we can see from the listings on the consultants page that we did not enforce a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice on the consultants page. * there are the actual websites of the consultants, like yours, and this submitted one up for consideration. It seems there is more concern to enforce a (TM) symbol after Apache OpenOffice for these third party websites. However, this is not something required by Apache. See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#attribution The important factor is referencing OpenOffice as Apache OpenOffice, and not the use the of the (TM) after the name. The website, http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html, seems to have all bases covered near as I can tell -- correct naming and use of (TM). -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: Hello *, From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] So...this thread does not meet lazy consensus but are we ready to implement this addition, without further changes, anyway? I'll be happy to take care of this either later today or tomorrow if we are. Can you please summarize what the solution should look like? The thread is long and I have somewhat lost track as point # 4 should be changed. Should he ever be changed or what says: ... Can be eased a bit as it is clear enough did the Items are with and for our project, respectively. product. In particular, it would be important for me to know whether I can change my website (http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html) or must. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org My take on this discussion so far (and I am certainly NOT the definitive judge on this): * there is the listing on the consultants page itself: http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html I wrote that page, so it might not be too presumptuous if I say what I meant when I wrote it ;-) The guideline is that the 3rd party pages must respect ASF Trademarks. This is vague, but intentionally so. I think we'll all be more accurate judges of what is wrong when we see it than we are predictors of all things that could possibly be wrong. So the discretion is given to the PMC to take this on a case-by-case basis. We should be looking at each submission and their linked websites as a whole. The kinds of abuses I had in mind were mainly pages that implied that the services were endorsed or affiliated with the ASF. This is much more than technicalities of whether or not a (TM) symbol is used. For example, a page that calls itself Apache OpenOffice (TM) Consulting Group would *not* be OK. We don't want our trademarks used as adjectives, since that suggests an affiliation. I also had in mind that we might need to correct names where they are misstated, e.g., Apache Open Office, Apache Openoffice, OpenOffice.org, etc. Regards, -Rob OK -- I think we should go ahead with this. Unfortunately, testing with my private web area on my box, my server is balking at the .xsl page that goes with this...so... Rob, since you have always taken care of this in the past, I would be fine and dandy with you committing this change -- wearing your Apache hat instead of your IBM one of course. ;) So sorry about this -- I guess it's time for more of us to give this area a bit more attention. concerning the actual content we are discussing. This does not have a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice. I thought this was the original cause of objection. And, we can see from the listings on the consultants page that we did not enforce a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice on the consultants page. * there are the actual websites of the consultants, like yours, and this submitted one up for consideration. It seems there is more concern to enforce a (TM) symbol after Apache OpenOffice for these third party websites. However, this is not something required by Apache. See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#attribution The important factor is referencing OpenOffice as Apache OpenOffice, and not the use the of the (TM) after the name. The website, http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html, seems to have all bases covered near as I can tell -- correct naming and use of (TM). -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: Hello *, From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] So...this thread does not meet lazy consensus but are we ready to implement this addition, without further changes, anyway? I'll be happy to take care of this either later today or tomorrow if we are. Can you please summarize what the solution should look like? The thread is long and I have somewhat lost track as point # 4 should be changed. Should he ever be changed or what says: ... Can be eased a bit as it is clear enough did the Items are with and for our project, respectively. product. In particular, it would be important for me to know whether I can change my website (http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html) or must. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org My take on this discussion so far (and I am certainly NOT the definitive judge on this): * there is the listing on the consultants page itself: http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html I wrote that page, so it might not be too presumptuous if I say what I meant when I wrote it ;-) The guideline is that the 3rd party pages must respect ASF Trademarks. This is vague, but intentionally so. I think we'll all be more accurate judges of what is wrong when we see it than we are predictors of all things that could possibly be wrong. So the discretion is given to the PMC to take this on a case-by-case basis. We should be looking at each submission and their linked websites as a whole. The kinds of abuses I had in mind were mainly pages that implied that the services were endorsed or affiliated with the ASF. This is much more than technicalities of whether or not a (TM) symbol is used. For example, a page that calls itself Apache OpenOffice (TM) Consulting Group would *not* be OK. We don't want our trademarks used as adjectives, since that suggests an affiliation. I also had in mind that we might need to correct names where they are misstated, e.g., Apache Open Office, Apache Openoffice, OpenOffice.org, etc. Regards, -Rob OK -- I think we should go ahead with this. Unfortunately, testing with my private web area on my box, my server is balking at the .xsl page that goes with this...so... The command line should look something like: xsltproc -o consultants.html --stringparam locale en to-html.xsl consultants.xml You can switch locales by setting different values via stringparam parameter. Other XSLT engines should work, but the command line would be different. Rob, since you have always taken care of this in the past, I would be fine and dandy with you committing this change -- wearing your Apache hat instead of your IBM one of course. ;) Sure, I can do it next week when I am at my desk. Regards, -Rob So sorry about this -- I guess it's time for more of us to give this area a bit more attention. concerning the actual content we are discussing. This does not have a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice. I thought this was the original cause of objection. And, we can see from the listings on the consultants page that we did not enforce a (TM) after Apache OpenOffice on the consultants page. * there are the actual websites of the consultants, like yours, and this submitted one up for consideration. It seems there is more concern to enforce a (TM) symbol after Apache OpenOffice for these third party websites. However, this is not something required by Apache. See: http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#attribution The important factor is referencing OpenOffice as Apache OpenOffice, and not the use the of the (TM) after the name. The website, http://www.jm-schmidt.de/inhalt.html, seems to have all bases covered near as I can tell -- correct naming and use of (TM). -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.”
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Marcus (OOo) marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 10/23/2013 12:04 AM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Drew Jensendrewjensen.inbox@gmail.**comdrewjensen.in...@gmail.com wrote: Howdy Rob, Ah trademarks - yes, I agree the Apache OpenOffice should have a TM, a la: IBM® Lotus® Symphony™ is a suite of open source office applications. FYI on the existing consultant entries http://www.openoffice.org/**bizdev/consultants.htmlhttp://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html none have the TM after Apache OpenOffice, and some don't even have Apache in front of OpenOffice. So...not sure if we should manually correct these already approved submissions. Of course, it's our site so we can do what we want. My point is we should be consistent in how OpenOffice is presented in them -- with Apache or not; with TM after or not. I also think that webpage should show consistent information. As the existing items don't have too much indication about trademarks co., IMHO we can also abstain with regards to Rob's suggestion. Furthermore: The top headline says it all: ;-) Apache OpenOffice Consultants So, I think the point #4 on http://www.openoffice.org/** bizdev/consultant-submission.**htmlhttp://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultant-submission.html can be eased a bit as it is clear enough that the items are with and for our project resp. product. Marcus So...this thread does not meet lazy consensus but are we ready to implement this addition, without further changes, anyway? I'll be happy to take care of this either later today or tomorrow if we are. A couple of quick questions if I may. Will the support only be available to those with the IBM connectors? IIRC that was the plan in the past. Also, does IBM have any plans to list AOO support on the United States GSA registry? This was available in the past but not available for the last few years. Thanks, //drew On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Jörg Schmidtjoe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] Sorry, but I think the website does not comply with the necessary formalities. Always has been emphasized, these are marked on the relevant websites trademark of Apache, for example: IBM Support for Apache OpenOfficeTM and not only: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice I think that would be more confusing. Sorry, but appearance is imho not so much the issue here, but rather trademark rights of Apache. Yes, that is formal, but how else should this be handled? It would suggest the entire name was a trademark since it is a continuous name with capital letters. It does not have to be in the headline. Put identification in continuous text, for example in: IBM® Support for Apache OpenOffice™ offers expert technical support for Apache OpenOffice™, ... where IBM is already marked with ®. Greetings, Jörg --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
Re: Submission for consultants page
Howdy Rob, Ah trademarks - yes, I agree the Apache OpenOffice should have a TM, a la: IBM® Lotus® Symphony™ is a suite of open source office applications. A couple of quick questions if I may. Will the support only be available to those with the IBM connectors? IIRC that was the plan in the past. Also, does IBM have any plans to list AOO support on the United States GSA registry? This was available in the past but not available for the last few years. Thanks, //drew On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] Sorry, but I think the website does not comply with the necessary formalities. Always has been emphasized, these are marked on the relevant websites trademark of Apache, for example: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice TM and not only: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice I think that would be more confusing. Sorry, but appearance is imho not so much the issue here, but rather trademark rights of Apache. Yes, that is formal, but how else should this be handled? It would suggest the entire name was a trademark since it is a continuous name with capital letters. It does not have to be in the headline. Put identification in continuous text, for example in: IBM® Support for Apache OpenOffice™ offers expert technical support for Apache OpenOffice™, ... where IBM is already marked with ®. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Drew Jensen drewjensen.in...@gmail.comwrote: Howdy Rob, Ah trademarks - yes, I agree the Apache OpenOffice should have a TM, a la: IBM® Lotus® Symphony™ is a suite of open source office applications. FYI on the existing consultant entries http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html none have the TM after Apache OpenOffice, and some don't even have Apache in front of OpenOffice. So...not sure if we should manually correct these already approved submissions. I think the concern is how OpenOffice is referenced on the vendor's linked website, not on our own website. All www.openoffice.org pages are already covered by having the logo in the upper left, since that has the (TM) symbol. Regards, -Rob Of course, it's our site so we can do what we want. My point is we should be consistent in how OpenOffice is presented in them -- with Apache or not; with TM after or not. A couple of quick questions if I may. Will the support only be available to those with the IBM connectors? IIRC that was the plan in the past. Also, does IBM have any plans to list AOO support on the United States GSA registry? This was available in the past but not available for the last few years. Thanks, //drew On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] Sorry, but I think the website does not comply with the necessary formalities. Always has been emphasized, these are marked on the relevant websites trademark of Apache, for example: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice TM and not only: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice I think that would be more confusing. Sorry, but appearance is imho not so much the issue here, but rather trademark rights of Apache. Yes, that is formal, but how else should this be handled? It would suggest the entire name was a trademark since it is a continuous name with capital letters. It does not have to be in the headline. Put identification in continuous text, for example in: IBM® Support for Apache OpenOffice™ offers expert technical support for Apache OpenOffice™, ... where IBM is already marked with ®. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- - MzK There's so much boldness in living life this way ... we did it all, and no one can take it away from us. -- Diana Nyad - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Drew Jensen drewjensen.in...@gmail.com wrote: Howdy Rob, Ah trademarks - yes, I agree the Apache OpenOffice should have a TM, a la: IBM® Lotus® Symphony™ is a suite of open source office applications. I've put in a request to get that page updated. A couple of quick questions if I may. Will the support only be available to those with the IBM connectors? IIRC that was the plan in the past. It is certainly possible to combine IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice along with a license for IBM Connections or SmartCloud. In that case our Connector [1] would be supported as well. We also have an integration solution for OpenOffice and IBM Enterprise Content Management [2]. We're exploring other integrations as well. That said, if a customer wants help with a large, complex, standalone deployment of Apache OpenOffice, we'll talk with them. That was also the case with Symphony. Also, does IBM have any plans to list AOO support on the United States GSA registry? This was available in the past but not available for the last few years. I have no idea. Should we? Regards, -Rob [1] http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/ibm-connections-connector-apache-openoffice [2] http://www-01.ibm.com/software/data/information-agenda/catalog/profiles/OpenOffice_Integration_IBM_ECM.html Thanks, //drew On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Jörg Schmidt joe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] Sorry, but I think the website does not comply with the necessary formalities. Always has been emphasized, these are marked on the relevant websites trademark of Apache, for example: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice TM and not only: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice I think that would be more confusing. Sorry, but appearance is imho not so much the issue here, but rather trademark rights of Apache. Yes, that is formal, but how else should this be handled? It would suggest the entire name was a trademark since it is a continuous name with capital letters. It does not have to be in the headline. Put identification in continuous text, for example in: IBM® Support for Apache OpenOffice™ offers expert technical support for Apache OpenOffice™, ... where IBM is already marked with ®. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
Am 10/23/2013 12:04 AM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Drew Jensendrewjensen.in...@gmail.comwrote: Howdy Rob, Ah trademarks - yes, I agree the Apache OpenOffice should have a TM, a la: IBM® Lotus® Symphony™ is a suite of open source office applications. FYI on the existing consultant entries http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html none have the TM after Apache OpenOffice, and some don't even have Apache in front of OpenOffice. So...not sure if we should manually correct these already approved submissions. Of course, it's our site so we can do what we want. My point is we should be consistent in how OpenOffice is presented in them -- with Apache or not; with TM after or not. I also think that webpage should show consistent information. As the existing items don't have too much indication about trademarks co., IMHO we can also abstain with regards to Rob's suggestion. Furthermore: The top headline says it all: ;-) Apache OpenOffice Consultants So, I think the point #4 on http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultant-submission.html; can be eased a bit as it is clear enough that the items are with and for our project resp. product. Marcus A couple of quick questions if I may. Will the support only be available to those with the IBM connectors? IIRC that was the plan in the past. Also, does IBM have any plans to list AOO support on the United States GSA registry? This was available in the past but not available for the last few years. Thanks, //drew On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:44 PM, Jörg Schmidtjoe...@j-m-schmidt.de wrote: From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] Sorry, but I think the website does not comply with the necessary formalities. Always has been emphasized, these are marked on the relevant websites trademark of Apache, for example: IBM Support for Apache OpenOfficeTM and not only: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice I think that would be more confusing. Sorry, but appearance is imho not so much the issue here, but rather trademark rights of Apache. Yes, that is formal, but how else should this be handled? It would suggest the entire name was a trademark since it is a continuous name with capital letters. It does not have to be in the headline. Put identification in continuous text, for example in: IBM® Support for Apache OpenOffice™ offers expert technical support for Apache OpenOffice™, ... where IBM is already marked with ®. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
Rob Weir wrote: consultant nameIBM/name countryGlobal/country ... /consultant Received. Subject to lazy consensus as usual, we can add it to the Consultants page in 72 hours. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
Hello, From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] Received. Subject to lazy consensus as usual, we can add it to the Consultants page in 72 hours. In this Case unfortunately: -1 (But I do not know if I can vote here) Sorry, but I think the website does not comply with the necessary formalities. Always has been emphasized, these are marked on the relevant websites trademark of Apache, for example: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice TM and not only: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice See point 4 in: http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultant-submission.html Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
Rob Weir wrote: In the context of the page it makes full acknowledgement of where Apache OpenOffice is from. The page footer, or the last paragraph of the text, could still explain that Apache OpenOffice is a trademark of the Apache Software Foundation. This is not confusing to users and won't harm. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Submission for consultants page
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] Sorry, but I think the website does not comply with the necessary formalities. Always has been emphasized, these are marked on the relevant websites trademark of Apache, for example: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice TM and not only: IBM Support for Apache OpenOffice I think that would be more confusing. Sorry, but appearance is imho not so much the issue here, but rather trademark rights of Apache. Yes, that is formal, but how else should this be handled? It would suggest the entire name was a trademark since it is a continuous name with capital letters. It does not have to be in the headline. Put identification in continuous text, for example in: IBM® Support for Apache OpenOffice™ offers expert technical support for Apache OpenOffice™, ... where IBM is already marked with ®. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
