Inputs from key stakeholders is essential (including marketing,
design, UX team AND copywriters). After that, he would propose some
"seed" designs, so that all members can brainstorm. (Normally
designers do that to gauge the mood of their clients.)
Sorry - I don't think that anybody here will be able to provide him with
all the necessary inputs. Either you will have the time to tell him the
essentials or he will have to find out through our past and present
activities. Most of them have been collected by website team members,
when they followed the idea of Drupal implementation, but I don't know
if anybody has the time to provide your expert with their results.
I started that initiative (NOT part of "Drupal", but phase-2), but we have not yet managed to
collect the specific needs of each type of stakeholders (we have identified 23 types of
stakeholders in the LibO stakeholders). But the present website mainly addresses LibO-users; and
their needs are known. Market-study inputs are awaited from Italo, though.
Even if he might get a first collection of preconditions, people will
come and claim their needs afterwards: That's normal reaction to work on
the area where you have to do most of the work, until another area shows
possible drawbacks for future activities.
Yes. That happens in any website design, too.
Many people cannot visualize the design in advance, but once a preliminary design is ready, their
needs/wants are raised.
In website design, we generally don't follow the waterfall SDLC anyway!
Based on the discussion, he would make the final design (HTML code,
icons). There may be one or more rounds of this.
Or the team decides to use his work as a basis for *our* final design.
This is an option he *will have to accept*. He is not the only expert in
this field, but his input is appreciated.
I agree. I believe that in an open source project things ought to be improved constantly.
No one has a right to declare his work to be final/permanent.
But there has to be a caveat: Everyone should respect what a
web-designer says about his field. Do not try to foist outside
concepts on web design.
Sorry, you don't see the central point:
The website is part of the community - and therefore it might be (not
necessarily, but I can't preclude it) that there are needs not being
able to be integrated in his concept.
It's the community who decides about the tools - and web design is one
of the tools we use for our needs.
If there is a disagreement, we settle it by referring to reference
literature on UX and web design. (Like the link I quoted.) AGREED?
If there is a disagreement, every position has to be make understandable
to the other side, so everybody has to find his way to an agreement or
If the community will not follow your expert's opinion, it's still the
community to decide what to implement and what to leave.
But: The community doesn't consist of idiots only! So we are capable to
see the advantages of a good web design.
I suppose that's reasonable.
But if you see the recent argument about adding even more text, I am not so sure whether the
website will stay on course.
Domain expertise should be given more weight (That's why the Design team can play a vital role
If we are clear about our workflow, I can request my colleague to
come in and help. I'd like a clarity and consensus on this point, please!
We have skilled web designers in our team - like Nik - so he will not be
the only "expert" (and he should avoid to behave so).
I agree completely. The more fruits a branch bears, the lower it bends.
If he can stand discussion and proposals for improvement, leading to a
collaborative work, he is more than welcome.
But the final result will be the communities web design - not his
donation (or how he might call it).
Yes, of course!
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to email@example.com
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
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