[Webteam] 2nd Draft of About section

[Brad Fuller]

I like your text, Göran. I think you write very well!
As you know, my personal preference was that I thought the front page
should not contain lengthy text. But, that's just a matter of style, and
only my opinion.

Regarding the front page: what I wanted to do is to have a very nice
concise paragraph encapsulating all of your text on the front page. Hard
to do. If you think you can improve on the front page it would be great.

Larry Trutter wrote:
>> From: Göran Krampe <goran at krampe.se>
>> To: webteam at lists.squeakfoundation.org
>> Subject: Re: [Webteam] 2nd Draft of About section
>> Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2007 09:50:04 +0100 (CET)
>>
>> Hi all!
>>
>> > Larry Trutter skrev:
>> >> The latest version of the draft is now at
>> >> http://wwwtest.squeak.org/About/ .
>> >> All the links are there and tested. Feel free to double-check.
>>
>> Ok, here comes a lengthy feedback post. Sorry for being late but I didn't
>> want to give feedback since I felt I was the wrong guy doing it (since I
>> wrote the frontpage which had much of this text - but IMHO in a carefully
>> discussed and improved form). But here goes anyway:
>>
>> First sentence:
>> "Squeak is a highly portable"
>>
>> Possibly the first parts of this paragraph feel a bit redundant after the
>> bullet list:
>>
>> "Every release includes platform-independent support for color,
>> sound,network access, and a full complement of developer tools with
>> complete source code."
>>
>> Perhaps:
>>
>> "Every release includes the complete source code for everything,
>> including
>> developments tools."
> 
> I incorporated your concise wording.
> 
>> This part feels old and I believe my version (which has been removed) was
>> better:
>> "Windows NT, XP, Windows CE(it runs on the Cassiopeia and the HP320LX),"
>>
>> ...should perhaps be like this:
>> "most flavors of Windows including CE/PocketPC, all common flavors of
>> UNIX
>> and Linux, Acorn RiscOS, OS/2 and even a bare chip (the Mitsubishi
>> M32R/D)."
> 
> I'm more inclined to strike out that entire paragraph and use your
> bullet list since it is much more concise. The About page is getting a
> little bit long anyway. If it's ok with the community to use your  list,
> I'll do just that and strike out that paragraph.
> 
>> So I am not sure why we went back to the old bullet list. Feel free to
>> merge them again somehow.
> 
> I can either attempt to merge the two lists or simply just use your list
> to completely replace the old list.  I guess I'm asking the community if
> it is ok to just use Goran's list or is there any portion of the "old"
> bullet list that should be retained at all? Most of those old list
> directly came from Dan Ingall's "Back to the Future" or his other
> writings back in 1998-2000 time period.
> 
> 
>> I would consider scratching this paragraph (too vague IMHO and that whole
>> section gets a bit too "fluffy"):
>> "Many meaningful and motivating projects helps them develop as logical
>> thinkers, and helps them understand the workings of the new technologies
>> that they encounter everywhere in their everyday lives."
> 
> It was an attempt to showcase the educational aspect of Squeak and what
> we are hoping to achieve for education. I'm unsure what is meant by
> "fluffy"?
> 
>> This paragraph is not entirely true (IIRC some newer images do not
>> necessarily run on older VMs). I would also change "interpreter" to
>> "virtual machine" in any case:
>>
>> "Any image file will run on any interpreter even if it was saved on
>> completely different hardware, with a completely different OS (or no
>> OS at
>> all!)."
>>
>> Strike "interpreter" in:
>> "including the virtual machine interpreter"
> 
> I made the change.
> 
>> Typos:
>>
>> "Squeakís virtual machine"  "as ìa portable"
> 
> Corrected.
> 
>> In fact, there seems to be a general problem with quoting:
>>
>> ìa system as immediate and tactile as a sketch pad, in which you can
>> effortlessly mingle writing, drawing, painting, and all the structured
>> leverage of computer science. Moverover, imagine that every aspect of
>> that
>> system is described in itself and equally amenable to examination and
>> composition.î
> Corrected
> 
>> I guess it should be "could" in this sentence:
>> "that should be programmed"
> 
> The reason why I used "should" is that it conveys that one of the goals
> that the community is trying to achieve. I don't think we are at the
> point where end user "could" do it now. If it is not clear, let me know
> how I can reword it better.
> 
> Thanks for your valuable input! Having feedback really helps.
> -Larry Trutter
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
>> From predictions to trailers, check out the MSN Entertainment Guide to
>> the 
> Academy Awards®
> http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline1
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Webteam mailing list
> Webteam at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/webteam
> 


-- 
brad fuller
www.bradfuller.com