Thanks Christoph and Tom
Le 2011-04-27 09:03, Tom Davies a écrit :
an interesting thread ... indeed. One little comment ...
Am Dienstag, den 26.04.2011, 00:02 -0400 schrieb Marc Paré:
As far as the text in the material, in this particular case ...
marketing material, the marketing team would give approval for the
included in document/materials. Marketing text is not the area of
expertise of the design team.
This should be clear to everybody:
For text in marketing material marketing expertise is crucial, so
list is the appropriate place to discuss and decide it.
Let's say the place is better suited, since its more likely that we have
more people here being interested in Marketing related issues (keeping
their eyes and ears open).
But the good thing about community is that many others are quite
capable ... whether it is QA, l10n, Marketing, Design. So (simplified)
team XYZ can contribute to such discussions like team ABC - but they
should really meet at the dedicated list.
Some things seem to inevitably be cross-discipline and so many people subscribe
to more than one list while focussing on perhaps just 1 for most of their
discussions. It's something that seems so much easier in OpenSource or
Community Led Organisations.
Agree on both counts. Obviously, many of us frequent/lurk/participate on
many lists that are of personal interests. Thus making us members of
these lists (at times we wear many hats). Its by making the process
clearer that we will have a more effective participation from our
membership and new and old (members).
Arguably, some of our members may not need as much direction as they
have shown the respect for the underlying informal process (in this case
the approval process for newly designed elements), but it is to avoid
any newer members, unaware of these informal processes, to feel lost and
perhaps involving too much of their efforts on a new design that may in
the end be rejected outright and having them feel abandoned.
If we can clear up the process and itemize it on a wiki page, then it is
to all our advantage.
So, I feel we should clarify (for LibreOffice/TDF materials or for any
materials looking for TDF official support/sanction):
* the design approval process for new elements as well as mention the
usage "rules" behind the pre-approved elements.
* the marketing approval process where we have an agreement to connect
with Italo so that he may have a look at the material before publication.
Once clarified, the process should then be noted on a wiki page
accessible to all wanting to contribute on both these counts.
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to email@example.com
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/marketing/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Re: Third Party Logs wiki page · Tom Davies
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Third Party Logs wiki page · Tom Davies
[libreoffice-marketing] Re: Third Party Logs wiki page · Marc Paré
- Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Re: Third Party Logs wiki page (continued)
Impressum (Legal Info)
: 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