On Sat, 2010-12-18 at 18:57 +0000, James Andrew wrote: > Firstly, we are doing documentation on OOo, not ODF in general.
We are now, but why limit ourselves for the future? > That > would be misleading to new visitors to the website - unless we > include in big writing in paragraph one on the home page that we > write OOo documentation despite our name. Seems a bit silly. We can write a suitable intro. It would not be difficult and IMO is not silly at all. > > If LibreOffice is intending to be an essentially renamed and 99%- > similar OpenOffice, then perhaps we could try to find a name which > covers both, but this is no easy task and if the greatest fear is > actually the reaction of Oracle, that is a big reason to stop and > think. ODF (OpenDocument Format) covers both, and other products as well. BTW, you do know that the organisation which owns the OOoAuthors domain name, and publishes the printed copies of OOoAuthors' books, is named Friends of OpenDocument, Inc.? That name (FoOD for short) was chosen because it is more inclusive than Friends of OpenOffice.org, which the founders of FoOD considered. > > Secondly, I do think that it's important to know what OOoDev intend > to do with their name. Although it might not be obvious when visiting > the site that we'd be hosted by them, I think consistency is > important, especially if we (and other organisation) intend to work > more closely in future. I don't see the necessity. We are currently hosted by Enthought, but surely no one thinks there is any connection other than "kindly hosted by"? > > Like Andrew, I have no objection to the stated plan but I think we > should have a firmer idea of the plans of other groups before we do > anything. See above. --Jean --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
