OK, personal impression only: I find the rainbow coloring through the text of "Get it Here" to be distracting and not helpful. I know some subset of us know what the colors represent, but I see no need to be cute about it. (Yes, this will be on the final exam.)
I also hope that we might provide a specimen <a><image /></a> that provides alternative texts that are useful for screen readers, text-to-voice, etc., and other accessibility-oriented purposes. I suppose it will be tagged as English, since "Get it Here" is. I'm abstaining on this: Drew provides significant effort here, and I recognize that. I am providing my impressions FWIW. - Dennis PS: Perhaps others can suggest translations for use on non-English sites. The URL might then need to change as well. -----Original Message----- From: drew [mailto:d...@baseanswers.com] Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 13:57 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 21:51 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: > The way to deal with these things is acknowledge the need to use the > qualifier. Where there is a reasonable argument (blog titles on the ASF > home page for example) undertake to improve things and move on. > > These things come up occasionally when an interested IPMC member does a > review and sees things the rest of us missed. I brought it here in the hope > of preventing an IPMC mega-thread. Acknowledge it there, deal with it here. > > If it helps, I'm not worried about the logo thing, but that might be just > me. > Hi Ross, others, I'm not worried about the logo thing either per se, then again tradition is worth something isn't it. Anyway - here is one quick proposal for a logo change: http://lo-portal.us/aoo/temp/get-aoo-300x100-icv.png Let me know what folks, //drew > > On Saturday, 23 June 2012, Dennis E. Hamilton > <dennis.hamilton<dennis.hamil...@acm.org> > @ <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>acm.org <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>> wrote: > > I think it would be good and wait until the original reporter identifies > what the specific infraction is and what its cure is. One part of the > complaint is how AOOi is mentioned in tweets by @TheASF. Those are not, as > far as I am aware, anything under our control whatsoever. > > > > I would not dispense with full atom feeds. > > > > Having "(incubating)" used at the beginning of a post, even with a link > to what that entails, could be useful. Whether it needs to be in the title > or not remains to be seen. > > > > Of course, whatever the practice is asserted to be, it will need to be > honored by all incubating projects, of course. > > > > - Dennis > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir <robw...@apache.org>@ <robw...@apache.org> > apache.org <robw...@apache.org>] > > Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 08:40 > > To: ooo-dev@ > > <ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>incubator.apache.org<ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org> > > Subject: Re: Must use the incubating qualifier > > > > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:53 AM, drew jensen > > <drewjensen.inbox<drewjensen.in...@gmail.com> > @ <drewjensen.in...@gmail.com>gmail.com <drewjensen.in...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 09:51 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: > >>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 9:48 AM, drew <drew@ <d...@baseanswers.com> > baseanswers.com <d...@baseanswers.com>> wrote: > >>> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 08:52 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: > >>> >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Rob Weir <robweir<robw...@apache.org> > @ <robw...@apache.org>apache.org <robw...@apache.org>> wrote: > >>> >> > On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Ross Gardler > >>> >> > <rgardler <rgard...@opendirective.com>@<rgard...@opendirective.com> > opendirective.com <rgard...@opendirective.com>> wrote: > >>> >> >> It has been pointed out on the general list that AOO is not > always using > >>> >> >> the incubating qualifier. For example recent blog posts don't > include it. > >>> >> >> > >>> >> > > >>> >> > It is right there, first thing on the page, in a very large font, > for > >>> >> > every blog post: "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)" > >>> >> > > >>> >> > >>> >> E.g, : > >>> >> https://<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache> > blogs.apache.org<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache> > /OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache<https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/5_million_downloads_of_apache> > >>> >> > >>> >> Note the <title> of the page says "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)". > >>> >> Ditto for the largest (and first) header on the page. > >>> >> > >>> >> Looking at the general list, it sounds like NIck's issue was that > blog > >>> >> aggregators, such as used by Apache for generating content on the > home > >>> >> page are not picking up on this. > >>> > > >>> > Hi, > >>> > > >>> > Maybe, I just read the incubator list also I think Nick is saying that > >>> > _any_ time the phrase Apache OpenOffice is used it must have the word > >>> > incubating included, not just in the title. > >>> > > >>> > >>> But that's not the policy. The policy is that it must be called out > >>> as incubating at first mention in the document. > >> > >> That's what I thought also - I'm saying how it reads to me, that's all. > >> > > > > Maybe the key is to realize that when we publish a blog post, we > > publish two things: > > > > 1) A web page, which does IMHO have the correct incubation notices on it. > > > > 2) An Atom feed that will be used by websites and services outside of > > our immediate control, and which will not bring along the full page > > context from the blog. > > > > On the second one, I think the remedy might be get the incubation > > notice into the post ("entry") titles. It may be possible to do this > > automatically (per my previous post), but it could be done manually as > > well. > > > > -Rob > > > >>> > >>> -Rob > >>> > >>> > > >>> > //drew > >>> > > >>> > <snip> > >>> > > >> > >> > > > >
