Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Re: [steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-website] Website status


Hi David :)

Thanks :)  I have a very specific agenda at the moment and got  side-tracked by 
the website issue because of the sites i work on.  The ones here look great.  


Images
I really dislike jpgs because of the distortions they go through in editing.  
Png seems to get much less errors in compression and allows transparency and 
animation (obviously) and it's not a proprietary format but it is large.  I tend 
to keep originals in png or high-quality jpg.  Gif is very light-weight better 
for websites and is usually best for logos but its colour-range and other 
limitations means it can't always be used.  With Gimp it is usually quite fast 
to "Save As.. " png first and then as gif so that you can fall-back on the png 
if the gif goes pixellated or weird.

I hesitate to show the site i work on because my bosses actually prefer some 
very clunky and nasty things and i still haven't quite worked out how to sort 
templates in joomla so that article pages are restricted into the page defined 
in the template.  They are fun to work with and a very noble & worthy cause tho 
:)
http://www.cecf.co.uk

Hmm, now you wont respect me lol.  My criticisms of that site would fill 
volumes.
Regards from
Tom :)






________________________________
From: David Nelson <commerce@traduction.biz>
To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org
Sent: Wed, 22 December, 2010 11:25:27
Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-website] Website status

Hi Tom, :-)

It was an interesting and thoughtful perspective, and thank you for
taking the time to recount it.

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 18:33, Tom Davies <tomdavies04@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
I prefer
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/bbnG0Hny0SpccJIZsGp72A?feat=directlink
because it has less information and looks prettier.

Sadly, that seems to be what people want.  Information confuses people and 
seems
to need to be on subsequent pages.  Also the picture on

Well, that is the way we'll probably go. This content was an
"emergency job" intended to allow the site to be launched, and
everything will be up for review.

http://test.libreoffice.org
took ages to appear and people don't seem to have patience beyond a couple of
milliseconds and when it appeared the first image was 'horribly' complicated.
Isn't it a gif?  Could it be less size byte-wise?

It's a .png. I did all the other screenshots as high-quality .jpg
files because they are half to a third of the size, but the site's
lead admin prefers .png because of resizing considerations.

By contrast competitors websites show almost nothing and give almost no
information.  We see pictures of smart people in suits looking at a flashy
computer.  We see pictures of grannies leaning over toddlers both engaged with
whatever is going on on a more sensible looking computer.  We see a young
attractive 'housewife' sitting on over-large creamy coloured sofa either 
posing
sexily or demurely (or both) and looking at a flashy laptop.  If we ever see 
the
screen then there is some simple pie-chart of bar-graph or sometimes they risk
showing a line-graph (for business users).

Maybe you're right. We'll have a think about it over Christmas,
because it looks like the site won't roll out until January.

Personally i do like the narrower format because i have not yet followed
'everyone else' to widescreen.  Also for me personally (probably fairly
typically for a linux user) i do prefer having useful information right there
fast without having to dig around for it and the picture is what i personally
like as a linux-user because it show me useful stuff.  The info was well
written, compelling and succinct, telling me exactly the sorts of things that
people ask whenever they find me using OpenOffice (one that still has the Sun
logo).  However, while it may be great for existing linux-users we are not
typical of the general population out-there that we need to reach.

Well, where I live, very few people have wide screens. So what you say
in that respect is an important consideration. I'm glad you liked the
content. Maybe I'll just move it off the front page to another
location, as you suggest.

I do think both are great and both do the job of easy access to the download.
The text needs to be somewhere on the site and preferably just 1 click away or
reached when the page is scrolled down, something easy.

See above...

I would say keep the one we have already or switch to the one that is closest 
to
completion whichever one that is.

There are actually going to be two sites. One for LibreOffice, the
software, and one for The Document Foundation, the "umbrella
organization" fostering the project.

PS this is only my opinion and i might be a little bitter and twisted nowadays

Your thoughts were interesting and very enlightening. Please do stay
around the project.

If you'd like a suggestion of an area to get involved in, you might
like to consider the documentation team. Do sign up for the list at
documentation+subscribe@libreoffice.org if you have time to give.
We're a small team, but we are acquiring some fine members - we don't
discuss quite so much as on the other lists, but the team members are
cooperative, friendly people who quietly *produce* high quality work.
;-)

Thanks for your feedback, and read you next time. :-)

David Nelson

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
List archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


      
-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
List archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/
*** 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.