openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: Portable version (X-ApacheOpenOffice by winPenPack) updated
Date Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:28:09 GMT

On Jul 28, 2013, at 5:46 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:

> Am 07/28/2013 02:18 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.mail@wtnet.de>  wrote:
>>> Am 07/28/2013 01:56 PM, schrieb janI:
>>> 
>>>> On 28 July 2013 13:47, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.mail@wtnet.de>   wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Am 07/28/2013 12:37 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 24/07/2013 Hagar Delest wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Huge thanks for such reactivity indeed.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> But a lot of people are missing it due to the "portable" version
being
>>>>>> too hidden in our download infrastructure.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What's the best solution to ensure that:
>>>>>> 1) Users can actually find the "portable" version and
>>>>>> 2) Users are correctly informed that this is a third-party port?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> My proposal (subject to lazy consensus or discussion here) would
be to
>>>>>> modify
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**download/<http://www.openoffice.org/download/>
>>>>>> as follows: add it to the line that says
>>>>>> Get all platforms, languages, language packs | Source Code tarballs
and
>>>>>> SDK |
>>>>>> so that it becomes
>>>>>> Get all platforms, languages, language packs | Source Code tarballs
and
>>>>>> SDK | Third-party and portable versions
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> and to link the additional text to
>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/>
>>>>>> so that people are correctly informed. This also ensures that when/if
we
>>>>>> have other portable versions available nothing needs to be changed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> To have a visible impression see here:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://ooo-site.staging.**apache.org/download/test/**index.html<http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/test/index.html>
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> +1, is "portings" the right word ? my dictionary suggest "ports",  but I
>>>> am
>>>> no native speaker.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hm, my favorite online dictionary says "portings". ;-) Let's see what our
>>> native speakers will say.
>>> 
>> 
>> "ports" is more usual in a software context.
>> 
>> But "portable" is ambiguous, since it means two things:  1) capable of
>> being ported to multiple platforms.  2) something you can carry.
>> 
>> Since we offer portable code, ports of the binaries and a portable
>> version, it is hard to avoid confusion here ;-)
> 
> The link says:
> Portable USB version and other third-party portings

I think "Third-party ports including a portable USB version" is better US English.

> 
> and the title:
> Get Apache OpenOffice as portable USB version or choose from other third-party portings

"Get third-party ports of Apache OpenOffice including a portable USB version."

> 
> Shouldn't this be enough to make it clear? Or is it better when I replace "Portable USB
version" with "Portable USB App"?

If we say App then users will be thinking "App Store".

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Marcus
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org


Mime
View raw message