[odf-discuss] Promotion site

[Chris Puttick]

@Peter

I'm not creating a new site, I'm trying to help people promote the use
of the standard ISO26300 by providing information in a simple overview
fashion on a single page, with links that:

(a) provide lots of further information for those interested;

(b) provide evidence that it is in wide use;

(c) provide quick links to compliant software so that people who just
received an email with an ODF document attached can get and install
software to read/edit the attachment.

Existing sites like those of the Fellowship and the Alliance are much
more in depth and therefore potentially off-putting to those who may
already be feeling inconvenienced by this stupid attachment that the
office suite can't open and Outlook doesn't recognise...

Also, in the UK at least, ISO carries some weight i.e. if we question
someone's inability to deal with an ISO standard it is far more
persuasive than if we question their ability to deal with something
called open document format.

@Marco:

I agree with the archaeology issue, that's why the new footer uses
http://iso26300.info ;) - actually my concern is a lot of the
recipients of our corporate emails will be regional government,
consultancies and construction companies, who will be stung by the ISO
tag and their inability to deal with it. I hope!

I deliberately avoid the suggestion there is already a standard, as
for me de facto just doesn't count - maybe if I prefixed it with
"formal", "approved" and/or "vendor neutral"?

I'll add the article link to our Open Archaeology section and to our
Launchpad page. Nice summary of the options although I'm surprised Ben
didn't just push the scientific requirement of using open source for
analysis!

Cheers

Chris

On 12/09/2007, M. Fioretti <mfioretti at nexaima.net> wrote:
>
> On Wed, September 12, 2007 12:39 pm, Chris Puttick wrote:
>
> > "Files attached to this email may be in ISO 26300 format (OASIS Open
> > Document Format). If you have difficulty opening them, please visit
> > http://openarchaeology.net/iso26300 for more information. "
>
> Well done! Just a couple of comments:
>
> "Until the creation of ODF there had been no standard method"
>
> a standard method surely existed, in the eyes of the general public,
> including most scientists: "doesn't everybody use Microsoft Word?"
> Wouldn't it be more effective to say "no standard method that didn't force
> you to depend on only one company"?
>
> Second note: since you're pointing to an openarcheology.net URL, and probably
> many of the recipients of those messages will be archeologists, maybe
> adding a link to http://www.linux.com/articles/55248 may help them to put
> thing
> in context. Feel also free to contact me privately if you feel there is stuff
> for a follow-up to that article.
>
> HTH,
>       Marco
> --
> The one book on software and digital technologies that no parent or
> teacher can ignore:                  http://digifreedom.net/node/84
>
> _______________________________________________
> odf-discuss mailing list
> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
>


-- 
My employers website: http://thehumanjourney.net - opinions in this
email are however very much my own and may not reflect that of my
current employer, past employers, associates, friends, family, pets etc..

Please do spam me: spam-me at thehumanjourney.net