[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-promo
Subject:    Re: [kde-promo] The KDE 4 Migration Story: authoring a presentable
From:       Inge Wallin <inge () lysator ! liu ! se>
Date:       2010-06-23 17:55:11
Message-ID: 201006231955.11552.inge () lysator ! liu ! se
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wednesday, June 23, 2010 18:13:17 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On June 22, 2010, Inge Wallin wrote:
> > That's awesome.  What we should do in the white paper is to include the
> > summaries and conclusions and the point the to techbase for more details.
> 
> agreed; and i think that's what is there now?
> 
> in addition to reaching the "Goldilocks Value" (aka "just right") for
> technical details, we need to also keep in mind brevity. i've been thinking
> about where in the decision making process this document comes, since that
> dictates a lot about length.
> 
> my thoughts are that this document fills a much needed space in two places:
> 
> * for face-to-face meetings (either in an office or at a conference) with a
> person where you have 10-60 minutes to interact with the potential adopter.
> this document can serve as both a basis for the conversation (3rd party
> authority, meaning that it isn't just what the KDE person is saying because
> after all they have an official document) as well as a take-away piece for
> when the meeting is over and the person walks away. along with a business
> card, this should give that person enough to remember to follow up and some
> information to go over again later to catch the points of interest and
> decide what they want to delve into deeper
> 
> * for people looking for those answers on their own. this document needs to
> get them over the gap between asking the question "Is KDE 4 what I want?"
> and doing real research and reading (e.g. techbase, the forums, etc)
> 
> as such, i don't think we'll be well serviced by a document that is too
> long. if we can keep the primary text succinct, with lots of nice
> footnoted references for further delving, then we stand a better chance of
> it being undestandable, clear and readable in a short enough period of
> time that people Get It(tm).
> 
> what do you think?

Agreed 100%

But for the first case an accompanying presentation is even better, especially 
if the adopter is not a person but a group.  A white paper is typically a 
take-away piece as you say, but it is also good to start a discussion around.  
However, it's not so good to base a presentation on. The difference is that in 
a discussion the information flow is two-way, but in a presentation it's one-
way.  Of course a good presentation is always followed by a discussion.
 
_______________________________________________
This message is from the kde-promo mailing list.

Visit https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo to unsubscribe, set digest on \
or temporarily stop your subscription.


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]