On Jul 28, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: > Am 07/28/2013 06:28 PM, schrieb Dave Fisher: >> >> On Jul 28, 2013, at 5:46 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: >> >>> Am 07/28/2013 02:18 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: >>>> On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Am 07/28/2013 01:56 PM, schrieb janI: >>>>> >>>>>> On 28 July 2013 13:47, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 07/28/2013 12:37 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 24/07/2013 Hagar Delest wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Huge thanks for such reactivity indeed. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But a lot of people are missing it due to the "portable" version being >>>>>>>> too hidden in our download infrastructure. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What's the best solution to ensure that: >>>>>>>> 1) Users can actually find the "portable" version and >>>>>>>> 2) Users are correctly informed that this is a third-party port? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> My proposal (subject to lazy consensus or discussion here) would be to >>>>>>>> modify >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**download/<http://www.openoffice.org/download/> >>>>>>>> as follows: add it to the line that says >>>>>>>> Get all platforms, languages, language packs | Source Code tarballs and >>>>>>>> SDK | >>>>>>>> so that it becomes >>>>>>>> Get all platforms, languages, language packs | Source Code tarballs and >>>>>>>> SDK | Third-party and portable versions >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> and to link the additional text to >>>>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**porting/<http://www.openoffice.org/porting/> >>>>>>>> so that people are correctly informed. This also ensures that when/if >>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>> have other portable versions available nothing needs to be changed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To have a visible impression see here: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://ooo-site.staging.**apache.org/download/test/**index.html<http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/download/test/index.html> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> +1, is "portings" the right word ? my dictionary suggest "ports", but I >>>>>> am >>>>>> no native speaker. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hm, my favorite online dictionary says "portings". ;-) Let's see what our >>>>> native speakers will say. >>>>> >>>> >>>> "ports" is more usual in a software context. >>>> >>>> But "portable" is ambiguous, since it means two things: 1) capable of >>>> being ported to multiple platforms. 2) something you can carry. >>>> >>>> Since we offer portable code, ports of the binaries and a portable >>>> version, it is hard to avoid confusion here ;-) >>> >>> The link says: >>> Portable USB version and other third-party portings >> >> I think "Third-party ports including a portable USB version" is better US >> English. >>> >>> and the title: >>> Get Apache OpenOffice as portable USB version or choose from other >>> third-party portings >> >> "Get third-party ports of Apache OpenOffice including a portable USB >> version." > > I want to put the portable thing first as it seems to be the more important > info. So, how to do it in better English?
Link: "Portable USB versions and third-party ports." Title: "Get Apache OpenOffice software packaged as portable USB versions and third-party ports." Regards, Dave > >>> Shouldn't this be enough to make it clear? Or is it better when I replace >>> "Portable USB version" with "Portable USB App"? >> >> If we say App then users will be thinking "App Store". > > OK > > Marcus > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
