[General] Update on Feature List

[Philippe Bossut]

Hi Mimi,

Looks great now! I think it's time to clear the *In Progress* text next 
to the top don't you think? :)

Cheers,
- Philippe

Mimi Yin wrote:
> Hi Philippe,
>
> Thank you for taking another careful sweep through this page. I've 
> made a few more minor:
>
> 1. Normalized capitalization. Only 'Chandler Concepts' are 
> capitalized. So recurring events isn't. But Tickler is.
>
> 2. Bolded what we're compatible with (nouns like iCalendar, WebDAV, 
> Evolution), not the ways we're compatible (verbs like import, 
> subscribet, etc)
>
> 3. Changed the description of the dynamic Who and Date columns to: 
> "Context sensitive Who and Date columns dynamically display item 
> metadata"
>
> 4. Tweaked the language around stamping. (I don't think we need an 
> intro sentence about kinds, too much into the weeds of implementation?)
>
> 5. Broke out bullets into sub-groups where it made sense. Particularly 
> under Organize you information..., Calendaring with Chandler Desktop 
> and Manage Information with Chandler Hub
>
> Re: Release Notes proposal. +1
>
> Mimi
>
>
> On Jul 27, 2007, at 4:51 PM, Philippe Bossut wrote:
>
>> Hi Mimi,
>>
>> Mimi Yin wrote:
>>> Hey Philippe. I've taken a pass at unifying the copy style. Please 
>>> take another sweep at it if you have time.
>> Great job Mimi! This is waaay better! :)
>>
>> I nit pick here and there:
>> - used Chandler Desktop consistently through the page so the reader 
>> can identify things easier
>> - used consistent punctuation
>> - compacted some statements
>> - fixed a bunch of puny layout issues
>> - used *bold* face for Chandler concepts only and only when 
>> introduced for the first time (instead of mix of concept, verbs...)
>>
>> Now we're (almost) done with that (I left the *In Progress* line at 
>> the top intact, you may want to clean that up), I'm wondering what we 
>> should do with a "release note" (this is assigned to me 
>> https://bugzilla.osafoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9608). We talked 
>> about it without really converging on a decision. FYI, here's the 
>> list of sections that the FireFox 2.0 release notes 
>> (http://en.www.mozilla.com/en/firefox/2.0/releasenotes/) covers:
>>
>> - What's New
>> - System Requirements
>> - Downloading
>> - Installing
>> - Uninstalling
>> - Extensions and Themes
>> - Known Issues
>> - Troubleshooting
>> - FAQ
>> - Contributed Builds
>> - Other Resources and Links
>>
>> I think we have *all* of this in various pages we just edited 
>> *except* for a "What's New" page, the argument being that, pretty 
>> much everything is new so the Feature List should be enough...
>>
>> ... but not everything is that new. There are people who have been 
>> following us (though they might not be users). So, the question is: 
>> should we create such a release note page, which will basically 
>> contain only a "What's New" section (new wrt to Chandler Desktop 0.6) 
>> and a profusion of pointers for the rest?
>>
>> I'd say "yes" but that's just my opinion.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> - Philippe
>> _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
>>
>> Open Source Applications Foundation "General" mailing list
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>