Hi Anders, *, On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Anders Holbøll <[email protected]> wrote: > On 13-02-2012 13:13, Christian Lohmaier wrote: >> >> sorry for jumping in late to the discussion... > > Well, I think you are allowed to take some weekends off :)
:-) - wasn't an all-off weekend though, also did something useful (protest against ACTA) >> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Anders Holbøll<[email protected]> >> wrote: >[...] > You mention ajax a few times, but I don't see the benefit in this case: It > would require JavaScript, Yes, but in all the time the LO site has been up, we didn't receive one single complaint about the site requiring javascript (or that, when javscript is disabled, the list of downloads is so huuuuuge - as when javascript is disabled, you get the alternative downloads ul in its expanded from... So I think it is safe to assume that virtually anybody who visits the sites to download LibreOffice has javascript enabled. But I surely won't force ajax on your proposal just for the sake of it :-) > [box & portable have different schedule] > In the implementation they are only shown if they are available for > download. If the language is in the MultilingualNormal that is offered, > otherwise if the language is in the MultilingualAll it is offered. I just > felt that it was better to give the user the complete picture of (relevant) > downloads, so they don't need to check multiple pages to make sure they are > really getting the right download. But removing the box is easy :) Yes, my concern is about the annotations the NL project might wish to add to those releases. > [...] >>> http://andershol.github.com/cms-code-demo/select-type.html >> >> Very nice already, I'd only make the emphasis for linux on x86 vs >> 64bit, and not deb vs rpm. And the "separate pages" can nicely be >> ajaxified > > I'm note sure I understand you correctly. At first I had removed the > selection between deb and rpm and just treated them as different file > formats (just as a windows installer might be a setup.exe and a setup.msi > and users don't really care). You have * deb (32bit, 64bit) * rpm (32bit, 64bit) I'd rather have * 32bit (deb, rpm) * 64bit (deb, rpm) It's a very minor thing. > But I'm not sure how different the rpm/deb > downloads are, The contents and also the split to the individual packages is the very same. It really only is the "container format" that is different. >>> http://andershol.github.com/cms-code-demo/select-language.html >> >> This is the only one that seems a little problematic to me - more >> precise: how to localize this. > > My plan was the translate the language names for the international sites. I > was actually a bit surprised that silverstripe didn't have translations for > the language names. It is a about 100 words so it should be doable. It is those 100 words for each language though... > I think > it is a problem with the current implementation (i.e. the dropdown) that the > language names are shown in their own language (and are not aligned) since > that makes it hard to skim through the list. The iso-codes doesn't seem that > user friendly. I guess people are use to it from OOo times already :-) And ideally the browser-language detection should cover most cases. > [...] Once again thanks for tackling this task and pushing me to clean up a bit :-) ciao Christian -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
