Hi Ivan,
> > After all, we are NOT screening a thousand contenders to select the lucky
> > winner.
> > So why do you feel this compulsion to get the designer approved by the
> > Design team?
I wanted to bring a designer strictly one time; only for the website work (not
on permanent basis).
He would have done this as a big favor to me.
So I proposed that he should be doing his good deed and go his way, but I could
not have him judged.
He would have been a rescuer, not a supplicant.
> I think there might be a misunderstanding here. The focus of the
> Design team is much broader than the website. For one, it has a focus
> on branding, which will necessarily set constraints on the website
> design (e.g. which colors to use, what kinds of styles to develop,
> etc). It also has a focus on user experience, which includes (among
> many other things) wireframing. From what I gather, you are interested
> in these topics. They can certainly be discussed here on the website
> list, but to get the big picture, I would suggest you also subscribe
> to the Design list to keep up with related developments. I think
> you'll be surprised by the talent we have and it would be great to
> have you on board.
sure! :)
> > And about this "approval" per se- How appropriate is it?
> > How exactly will the Design team approve the designer?
> >
> > You know the professional profile of my friend.
> >
> > Do we have bigger web professionals on board who can judge him?
>
> Not necessarily, but I don't like the implication of what you are
> saying because you are implicitly making a judgement yourself. No one
> can come in expecting a mandate to be handed over to them just because
> they are a professional - they will need to show that they can make
> tangible contributions to meet the needs of the project *now*. This
> will allow them to establish merit and have their suggestions taken
> seriously in the future.
He was NOT interested in joining the team.
He agreed to help out only because I requested.
He would have done his design, gifted it to me (to Libo) and moved on.
Why do we have to harass such good samaritans with our approval process?
If our car is wrecked on the road, and if someone is offering first aid, do we
subject him to full approval process?
Or just grab his offer thankfully?
> > And what has this to do with the OS model??
> > I refuse to believe that an OS project has to be run unprofessionally as a
> > policy.
> > Website design is a specialized field, and even an OS project would have to
> > follow its norms.
>
> Yes, there are some norms we need to follow, but there are also norms
> set by the project that website designers will need to follow. We are
> a collaborative volunteer community, not a web design firm. The
> dynamics are rather different - it can be a lot more complicated, much
> slower, but also very rewarding when it's done.
While handling guests. we have to be extra courteous, and not make them jump
hoops in the name of rules.
> > No I think the root cause is that some members lack knowledge of this field
> > (website design).
> > Then they try to make it up with common sense. This results in conflicts.
>
> I'm going to rewrite your statement in a way that I hope will make an
> important point. Please don't interpret it as if it refers to you
> specifically but rather try to see the point behind it (i.e., we need
> 'institutional knowledge' within the project as much as we need
> 'expertise' in a specific discipline):
> Some members lack the knowledge of this project (LibreOffice). Then
> they try to make it up with the way things are done elsewhere (be it
> design school, web design firms, commercial/'real life' experience,
> even other open source projects, etc). This results in conflicts.
UX principles will remain universal, as applied to a website for any purpose.
It has nothing to do with organizational dynamics.
Are dynamics responsible for the fact that the website lacks search, tag line,
AND site map?
Why is it designed for reading, as against scanning?
> > When two disparate Communities of Practice come together, it is best to
> > give space to the core specialists.
>
> Ideally, we will have a mix of big picture people and specialists. I
> don't mean 'big picture' in terms of a redesign; I mean 'big picture'
> as in "where does the website fit in LibreOffice, which projects or
> people should I ask for help on this or that task, how does the
> website design reflect, represent, or develop the visual 'language'
> established in the branding guidelines", etc. Design and website are
> not disparate communities; like Venn Diagrams, they have overlapping
> areas of interest.
I meant content-writers and graphic designers are disparate groups! :)
BTW you are right about the big picture- That's what we are going to discuss at
the conference call.
It's good to have this discussion.
Regards,
Narayan
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
