Maybe I am too late with this, but I have just a couple of comments. I like the clean slide layout with no unnecessary information like "name of the speaker" and "day of the talk" etc., it provides for a very high signal to noise ratio. The slides feel balanced.
On the other hand, there is too much text on each slide for my taste. Research has found that it is harder for people to absorb information when the same information is presented to you in spoken and written form at the same time. If you instead provide two forms that complement each other, like spoken words and a diagram, then it becomes easier to understand again. I loved the statistics in the end, I think they give one a good idea of how much of each ingredient is present in Sage. I had no idea that Scipy contributed so much, for instance. However, if you make a separate legend, like you do, then it becomes very hard to quickly see which color is which. Especially since some of these colors are going to be very hard to distinguish with a beamer. Instead, one should try to *minimize eye sweeps*, and present the information as close as possible. So preferably inside the pie chart, or at least directly around it. This is just a minor thing. I think the slides are really good. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
