Do you want to throw in language as a datum? Someone might reasonably list themselves as "Global" but be limited to, say, the english-speaking world.
Don On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 9:36 PM, Alexandro Colorado <j...@oooes.org> wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Albino B Neto <bin...@apache.org> wrote: >>> > Hi. >>> > >>> > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >> So I'm wondering... are there other kinds of certification of >>> >> interest, beyond user certification? Does anyone currently (or do we >>> >> anticipate) something like a "Certified OpenOffice Developer"? If so >>> >> we might want to reserve categories for "User Certification" and >>> >> "Developer Certification". (Admin certification as well?) >>> > >>> > Certification can be wide. How can we have certification for users, >>> > consultants, developers, I believe this could have shed, or maybe just >>> > for users and developers. >>> > >>> > It will depend on where the project wants to reach, but I think having >>> > to Users, Consultants and Developers. >>> > >>> > Because consultants and User: User who want to teach, increases your >>> > resume. Consultants who wish to migrate to companies etc. >>> > >>> >>> >>> OK. Let me restate this in another way: >>> >>> If we have a fixed schema (a fixed taxonomy or list of "areas of >>> practice") then this allows us to generate an UI that categories by >>> this value. So we could have a table of contents or navigation error >>> that takes you to a list of only "Migration" experts or only >>> "Certification" experts. For this to work well we need a pre-defined >>> list, of maybe 5-12 categories that we can fit everyone into. But if >>> every listing has its own unique category, then this is not very >>> useful. It doesn't help the consultant or the site visitor. >>> >>> But I don't want to do anything unnatural either. If the real world >>> doesn't fit neatly into 5-12 categories, we could abandon that kind of >>> categorization and just have it be a free entry field with no special >>> navigation. Or even eliminate it altogether in favor of the >>> unstructured "description" field. >>> >>> If we think we'll have many listings (more than a page) then having a >>> categorization would be helpful to the user, I think, to help them >>> find what they are looking for more easily. >>> >>> >>> In any case thanks to Ian for the listing data. Can anyone else offer >>> a listing? Alexandro, perhaps? >>> >> >> Our taxonomy only expanded to 3 'tags', Developer, Training, Consultant. >> Consulting would cover migration services. >> Development would cover VARs and ISV. >> Training will cover certification, book publishers, freelance trainers etc. >> >> It was common for companies to have two or three categories. >> > > I'm looking at the legacy OOo consultants.ods file, which used to be > on the website. It was structured like this: > > - 404 entities listed > > - grouped by country > > - sorted by country and local region, e.g. state or province > > - no description field, only the entity's name and URL > > - one or more categories from this list: > > Training (or training materials) - T > Light customization (macros, templates, ...) - L > Installation (support, pre-installation or distribution) - I > Help desk services, general support – H > Software programming (on demand / custom) - S > Custom programming (plug-ins, addons, etc) – P > > Of course, we don't need to do exactly the same thing, but that is one > example view of the world. > > -Rob > >> >> >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> >>> > Albino >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Alexandro Colorado >> PPMC Apache OpenOffice >> http://es.openoffice.org
