fantasai wrote:
http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/weblog/2004/documenting/
Gervase Markham wrote:
>
> You said:
> "There are some documents on MozillaZine's wiki that are great and
> should be on mozilla.org but aren't due to marketing constraints. Their
> overview of mozilla.org's products accurately demonstrates the problem:"
>
> I'm surprised you endorse:
> http://kb.mozillazine.org/index.phtml?title=Intro_:_Summary
> It seems to be not very well written.
<snipped examples>
Yes, that's true. But the difference I'm pointing out is in the target audience
and the sort of information that's presented. (I agree that MozillaZine's
documents lack polish and that many are outdated.)
To provide some counterexamples:
mozilla.org:
"Web browser built for 2004, advanced e-mail and newsgroup client, IRC chat
client, and HTML editing made simple."
mozillazine.org:
"The Mozilla Suite is the result of many years of hard work. It is designed
from the ground up to be robust, standards-compliant and flexible. It has
a Web browser (usually just called "Mozilla"), an e-mail and newsgroup
reader (Messenger), an HTML authoring tool (Composer), a contact manager
(Address Book), and an IRC chat client (Chatzilla). The Mozilla Suite is
the basis of Netscape 6 and 7."
The last two sentences in the mozillazine description are *useful* information.
E.g. naming the different components and exactly what they are, explaining the
relationship of Netscape and Mozilla.
The description of Firefox, Thunderbird, and Sunbird all include a brief note
about the status of each project and where its going.
The MozillaZine document is not pitching these products at the reader, but
rather giving a brief explanation so that the reader can read through other
mozilla.org documents and forums with a clearer idea of what's going on.
The mozilla.org products page does not do a good job of fulfilling this role;
it is too focused on driving downloads.
I also think that the marketing-driven prose on mozilla.org, especially on
the product page, is somewhat stilted. I see incorrect grammar on
MozillaZine's and perhaps somewhat more rambling prose, but not the same kind
of awkwardness.
There's also the fact that I really /don't/ like the marketer's "tone of
voice"--to me, /products talks at me as if I'm a thing. I'm much more
comfortable with MozillaZine's text because it's targetting a sentient
person. (I guess maybe I'm more put-off by advertisment text than most
people.)
~fantasai
--
http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/contact
_______________________________________________
mozilla-documentation mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-documentation
