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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: Really bad review of KOffice 1.4.1
From:       Martin Ellis <martin.ellis () kdemail ! net>
Date:       2005-09-18 14:29:24
Message-ID: 200509181529.24539.martin.ellis () kdemail ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

On Friday 16 Sep 2005 22:40, M. Fioretti wrote:
> > >Hence the word-count/filters comments to which I objected,
> >
> > So? I object to the fact that not only did you misquote Boudewijn,
> > and also said he was wrong, and still you failed to postulate an
> > alternative account of how a reviewer might behave.
>
> Now that you make me think about it, I also failed to postulate an
> alternative account of how a reviewer might iron his shirts. So?

I'm saying that it's unconstructive to tell someone that you think they are 
wrong without telling them why you think they are wrong.  In my experience, 
such behaviour is considered rude.

> I did not misquote Boudewijn, 

That's not true.

On Friday 16 Sep 2005 13:17, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> Now wordcount isn't all that important, so a review takes any old doc he
> has lying about, tries to load it, goes back to his web form or whatever
> content management system their magazine uses, and writes his review.

On Friday 16 Sep 2005 17:42, M. Fioretti wrote:
> 3) "so a reviewer goes back to his web form or whatever content
>    management system their magazine uses, and writes his review"

You see? You've not just para-phrased: your quote denotes (and indeed 
connotes) something very different.


> > You've not managed to link "developers simply fail to understand
> > questions and needs of end users" with "the fact that ... [the
> > reviewers] don't even get to the correct answer".
>
> Of course I didn't manage *that*, I said something else. 

Then you didn't manage to communicate your argument successfully.
I commented on the structure of your argument for a reason.

> What's that 
> "[the reviewers]" doing there?

It's there because I wanted to try to restate something that you said in 
coherent English.  My apologies if my substitution didn't represent the 
intended interpretation.

> I said that since often "developers simply fail to understand
> questions and needs of end users" then they (the end users) "don't
> even get to the correct answer". That is, the discussion often stops
> even before somebody says "you might import Access files in Kexi with
> mdbtools".

OK.  That's true.  But right now, KOffice developers are 
- reading the reviews;
- working on providing feedback mechanisms that normal users can use;
- working with usability people;
- working on improving the website so that it is easier for non-technical 
users to understand.

What other activities do you suggest would help us "understand questions and 
needs of end users"?

How do you think we should prioritise such activities compared to actually 
improving OpenDocument support, and providing features that we know are 
expected?

Martin

_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel

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