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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: Applications categories
From:       Thomas Zander <zander () kde ! org>
Date:       2009-02-27 17:26:16
Message-ID: 200902271826.21263.zander () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Thursday 26. February 2009 17:39:06 Cyrille Berger wrote:
> As you know the oxygen team is currently working on the icons for KOffice
> 2.0 applications, our logos are descritely used in those icons, since we
> used four colors for each of the category, this raised, on IRC, the
> question on the categories, and which apps belongs to which category.
[]
> But, it was noted that having almost all applications in one category was a
> bit silly, and defeat the point on having categories, so it was also
> suggested that "Productivity Applications" would be restricted to the
> "classical" three core office suite applications. 

As a basis I think it makes sense to consider the goals of categories.
As far as I am concerned the categories are there to address different target 
groups.  It will show up in presentation graphs and we can take one category 
and promote it on its own merit.
So, for explaining things to newcomers, the category of "productivity 
applications" is a nice grouping word that people consider the core office.
We could say that gnome office is equal to the KOffice set of productivity 
applications.

> Which lead to those categories:
> Productivity Applications: kword, kspread, kpresenter
> Creativity Applications: karbon14, krita
> Management Applications: kplato, kexi, kivio
> Supporting Applications: kchart, kformula

I think this is a very sane categorization.
We have 'productivity' which is what everyone in the world agrees is the core 
of the office suite.
We have "Creativity" which is what the karbon+krita devs want to market 
themselves as. (optionally without even noting its a part of KOffice)
We have the "supporting applications" that are really in the list just because 
the specification wants it, but most people don't ever start those apps 
separately.
The other set of applications are apps that are good at very specific stuff, 
quite specialized, really. This shows by the fact that KPlato and Kexi both 
have very little Flake integration. Kexi still has near zero KOffice 
integration.
So instead of giving each their specialized category; it makes more sense to 
join them into one and come up with a nice label for them.

> But the name of the third category, "Management Applications" is now
> questioned.

I can see their arguments. I'm personally not that concerned about the name, 
whatever it turns out to be. "Management" doesn't have an immediate 
association with project management in my mind.  Managing network routers 
with kivio makes sense to me.  Again, I don't have a problem with the name.

thinking out loud for alternatives;
"Structure Applications"
"Boring Applications"
"Not TeaTime"
"Stuff Managing Applications"

Ok, its Friday afternoon, what did you expect...

-- 
Thomas Zander

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
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]