Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index


Already working on it, I also noticed that. I also noticed that
the writer loved to mention the fact that it _CAN_ create professional
_LOOKING_ documents, as if it needed to be mentioned that software capable
of writing professional letters was hard to come by.
I also agree with you on the references, as well as filler sentences leading
nowhere.

One more thing I noticed was the personal style the writer chose, always
saying "they" and "you" and other words forcing LO down the readers throat.
I'm currently re-working the grammer and consistency, as well as removing
the redundancy. The actual content (or aim) isn't being changed, nor is the
layout and format (yet).

Clayton (Sky-) Walker

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Jaxson Lee <jaxsonlee69@gmail.com> wrote:

One thing that I was going to mention (my main reason for joining this list
actually) is the inconsistency between the application descriptions on the
Why for...? pages.

Take Impress - described as a "A presentation", "Presentation" and
"Presentation manager" on different pages. If we're describing the
application, it should be something like Presentation manager or
Presentation software, rather than just Presentation. That would describe
the document produced by it. Same for the spreadsheet - Calc is a
spreadsheet package, spreadsheet program and a spreadsheet application but
is not a spreadsheet.

Then on the Why for NFPs and NGOs page, it describes tasks that the suite
can do. "Word processor" is not a task nor is "Diagramming and charting
tool". Better to make it like the other pages, and describe the applications
 contained within the suite IMO.

Clayton makes some good points about the need to get these right - this is
where we're trying to sell the application to new users, so if it doesn't
read right then we'll end up putting people off.

Jaxson Lee


On 30/01/2011 16:02, Clayton Walker wrote:

Alright, cool.

Onto some critics, not so much ideas.
First off, my eyes just glazed over. I can't read walls of text. Inset
images are always nice, as long as they aren't too obtrusive and obscure.
I
can provide screen shots from a Mac, as I'm using one now.
Speaking of which, another huge point would be cross platform support,
that
is after all one of our larges selling points (next to the fact that it's
free.)
Also, an interesting Idea would be to just list VERY short bullet points,
maybe with tiny graphics included.

Just some ideas.


On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 4:51 PM, David Nelson<commerce@traduction.biz
wrote:

 Hi Clayton, :-)

Initially, I'd suggest that you read the Features section of the site,
and the sub-pages about the individual LibreOffice applications. My 2
cents would be to adopt a similar style layout-wise, and a similar
writing style, too.

That way, all content would be consistent, with no "mini-revolutions"
in a small subset of pages. 90% of the rest of the site content was
provided by myself, and I proofread/edited the rest, so my
*suggestion* would be to do the "Why?" pages on similar lines.

At a later date, we'll be re-visiting the page layouts with the
involvement of our Design team. At that time, we can spruce the page
presentations up a lot.

However, if you have new ideas about style and layouts, please do tell
us about them, so that we can take a look at them all together,
because fresh input is always welcome.

In any case, like Frank Sinatra sang, just do it your way, and then we
can take a look all together after.

And a big thanks for your help! :-)

David Nelson

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
documentation+help@libreoffice.org<documentation%2Bhelp@libreoffice.org>
<documentation%2Bhelp@libreoffice.org<documentation%252Bhelp@libreoffice.org>


List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***





--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
documentation+help@libreoffice.org<documentation%2Bhelp@libreoffice.org>
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***




-- 
Welcome to my signature!
Please note that this signature is licensed under the General Public
License. By embedding the signature, or parts of it, into your brain other
than by mere aggregation, your brain becomes a combined, and therefore
derived, work and thus must be licensed under the GPL too.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to documentation+help@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/documentation/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.