Hi again,
About the website: I think we should all work together to create something
good. So I encourage everyone to mockup some web pages (see
http://www.uxbooth.com/blog/15-desktop-online-wireframing-tools/ for some
nice wireframing tools), provide feedback for the mocked-up pages, and give
suggestions about how the website should look/work. I've done some basic
wireframes (very basic, very unclean, but I think it gives a good general
idea):
http://gomockingbird.com/mockingbird/index.html?project=d82ceee5a4806455c5a3a14094b62af90236f969,
plus I suggest we make a dark theme to conserve energy (Pixelmator has
a
really nice site in that respect). I'm also willing to do some basic web
writing (basic PHP, HTML, mySQL, that sort of stuff -- I really am just a
beginner).
So... I hope that people from art, ux, and the website start brainstorming
and working to create a more lucid version of the OOo website. And we can
also try working on re-branding OOo: Ubuntu 10.04 should be an inspiration (
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/03/ubuntu-gets-new-themes-logo-more.html).
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 6:01 AM, Irné Barnard <irne.barn...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> What you're referring to is how I would describe a truly Object Oriented
> Application. I.e. an extremely small minimalist base application. It should
> actually be the same base for Writer, Calc, Base, etc. To side-step
> convusion with OOoBase, lets call it the startup module. This startup should
> do nothing more than read settings, dynamically load other modules (shared
> libraries), provide a consistent file / peripheral handling to the modules &
> provide the messaging system between separate modules. Writer (or a
> minimalist part thereof) would be one such module, Impress another. Draw and
> Impress could even have a common main module and thus share common code that
> way. All these modules should be similar in concept to plug-ins. And they
> should be able to build & extend on one another, as well as "replace" one
> another.
>
> But as you can see, that's not going to happen by snapping a finger. It
> would literally mean the entire OOo code needs to be rewritten.
Yes. And I'm thinking it should be, for a number of reasons:
- To create a truly object-oriented application, as you described, which
would:
- Speed up OpenOffice.org
- Facilitate programming
- Make extentions more integrated
- Make OOo work uniformly
- To move OOo to the cloud (but it wouldn't have to host user files and
would still be downloadable), which would:
- Be revolutionary for businesses, which could now host, edit, and
present their own files on their own websites. And Ubuntu One could allow
users to edit their files in the browser. This space is as of yet
unoccupied, so this is a huge opportunity for OOo.
- Help OOo stay competitive (with companies like Microsoft, Google,
Apple, and Adobe now making their own online office suites)
- Make collaboration and other web features easier to incorporate
- Guarantee that OOo is cross-platform (especially when Google's
Chrome OS runs web apps only, and when OOo has no iPad/iPhone or Android
version): all the modern platforms, be it mobile or desktop, can run web
browsers
- Because we're already planning deep changes, like the Renaissance UI,
anyway
I really think a code rewrite inevitable if we want to keep OOo competitive.
