Re: Proposed Headline Style (Was Re: Standard Headlines for Fedora Magazine)
by Zacharias Mitzelos
I agree with the mixed ap style Joe suggested.. I wouldn't go only with the first letter of the sentence cap-ed, because if the word 'Fedora' is somewhere in the middle(or any other word of such importance) it needs to be cap-ed. Also all caps will be tiring, as visitors won't be able to distinguish the "important" words in the headline. So again the "Mixed Ap style" would be great. :)
Zacharias Mitzelos
--- Original Message ---
From: "Gabriele Trombini" <mailga(a)fedoraonline.it>
Sent: September 24, 2013 7:55 PM
To: "Fedora Marketing team" <marketing(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Subject: Re: Proposed Headline Style (Was Re: Standard Headlines for Fedora Magazine)
On 09/24/13 18:22, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 07:39:28PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 04:58:53PM -0500, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
>>> Can we agree on a standard and stick with it?
>>> I'd like to suggest AP Style or all caps. Thoughts, comments, flames,
>>> votes?
>> AP Style!
> So, I actually mixed up AP Style with what I'm more familiar with. Let's
> call it Wired Magazine style. I'd like to propose we use a style similar
> to Wired.com. Examples:
>
> BlackBerry Agrees to Sell Itself for a Measly $5 Billion
> Here's How We'll Make Hardware Startups More Than Just a Fad
> How to Use Chrome for Quick, Deep Searches on Any Website
> What Pop Culture Will Look Like 300 Years From Now, According to Star Trek
>
> You can find more on this here:
>
> http://geekdad.hotwired.com/notes/Style_Guide
>
> (Note, I plan to borrow liberally from this for a Fedora style guide.)
>
> Best,
>
> jzb
New York Times seems giving you reason [1], but I like caps only for the
first letter:
BlackBerry agrees to sell itself for a measly $5 billion
Here's how we'll make hardware startups more than just a fad
How to use chrome for quick, deep searches on any website
What pop culture will look like 300 years from now, according to Star Trek
Difference is that should be less confusing because you wrote:
BlackBerry Agrees to Sell Itself for a Measly .......
but maybe:
BlackBerry Agrees To Sell Itself For A Measly ........
If we don't read your link; and I'm not sure people wants read.
Anyhow in the howto we should write the Wired Style rules also in the
how to (or link the website) but this won't be immediate for the ones
writing posts for the first time.
We need something easier, without rules to learn.
Just between us, I like very much "Wired Magazine style". :-)
Gabri
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/
--
marketing mailing list
marketing(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
10 years, 7 months
Standard Headlines for Fedora Magazine
by Joe Brockmeier
Hey all,
I've noticed that we're not all using the same standards for headlines
on Fedora Magazine. Some are all initial caps, (e.g. "Fedora 20 Schedule
Updates) some are AP style (e.g. "Voting for Fedora 20 Name") and some
are caps only for proper nouns (e.g. "Fedora Badges released").
Can we agree on a standard and stick with it?
I'd like to suggest AP Style or all caps. Thoughts, comments, flames,
votes?
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier | Open Source and Standards, Red Hat
jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
10 years, 7 months
F20 Alpha announcement & release notes
by Jaroslav Reznik
Hi!
As the F20 Alpha is tomorrow, we need final text ready today to hand it over
to people who do announcement (this time it's nirik). I'm not sure I'll make
today's marketing meeting, so quick recap:
I've done a quick review of current version - changed final release to early
December, removed Vagrant change as it's not yet ready. The other Changes
should be ok - marked as MODIFIED in Bugzilla. IRC chat posted down on the
page is commented out now.
One question - how do we want to reference Changes? When it's clear we talk
about Changes (reference to ChangeSet), we should use it but we also talk a lot
about features in the text...
Otherwise I think it looks good, thanks a lot. Formatting for email is still
needed, Robyn usually does it.
Fedora_20_Alpha_release_notes already points to F20_Alpha_release_announcement.
Thanks
Jaroslav
10 years, 7 months
Expounding meeting minutes
by Gabriele Trombini
Hi,
as jzb said, it would be nice if someone could briefly expound the
topics of the minutes of each Fedora meeting held in order to make
understand to the people if they are interested (or not) without reading
the logs.
A sort of meeting recap.
I took a look to the meeting minutes ML, and I see this:
- QA
- FAmNA
- FESCo
- ARM
- EMEA
- Infrastructure
- Chinese
- APAC
- Docs
- SIG
- FAmSCo
- Marketing
- LATAM
- FPC
- Blocker Bugs
- Board
- Kernel
- Fedora-Fr
- IRC Support SIG
- Release Readiness
My thought is that, in the beginning, we should choose the relevant ones
and do it by ourself. In this direction I could report EMEA and FAmSCo,
because are the ones I follow.
In the future we must involve more people but should choose how as well;
we don't have to make people busier than they are now.
Gabri
10 years, 7 months
Re: F20 Alpha announcement & release notes
by Robyn Bergeron
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pete Travis" <me(a)petetravis.com>
> To: "For participants of the Documentation Project" <docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Cc: "Fedora Marketing team" <marketing(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 3:31:56 PM
> Subject: Re: F20 Alpha announcement & release notes
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Robyn Bergeron < rbergero(a)redhat.com >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Joe Brockmeier" < jzb(a)redhat.com >
> > To: "For participants of the Documentation Project" <
> > docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >
> > Cc: "Fedora Marketing team" < marketing(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >
> > Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 12:45:19 PM
> > Subject: Re: F20 Alpha announcement & release notes
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:46:33AM -0600, Pete Travis wrote:
> > > If we are discussing Changes, we should call them Changes. The word
> > > "feature" is natural in this context, but carries with it the connotation
> > > of the now-defunct Features process. I have a similar tendency to use the
> > > word "runlevel" for example, and make a conscious effort to use "target"
> > > as
> > > the correct term.
> >
> > How many of the folks in the audience have any awareness of the
> > distinction between "features" and "changes" in this context? I want to
> > make sure we're not getting bogged down with inside baseball.
> >
> > > The Changes process in and of itself is a notable organizational
> > > accomplishment. I see no value in obscuring our process for the sake of
> > > using the familiar and overloaded "feature." Let the readers find it
> > > strange if need be; it is a new thing, and this is the way of all new
> > > things.
> >
> > I think it's better for the minority of Fedorans who are actively
> > involved to have to cope with less specific language in general
> > communications than to "let the readers find it strange."
> >
> > Not sure that the difference between changes/features is enough to
> > really throw readers, but in general communications I think we should
> > always bow to the larger audience.
>
> I would also argue that if I was to see a list of "changes" - some of which
> are perhaps less buzzworthy than others (not for lack of interestingness,
> technical awesomeness, etc. but simply because some things catch more eyes
> than others) - I would almost expect that a list of changes would be in its
> entirety, as you might find it in more detailed release notes or
> documentation. Whereas "features" implies .. things that we are featuring.
> Highlighting. Not a complete list.
>
> I also think that it (Features) works in terms of consistency - when we get
> to the point that we are doing Feature stories, they're not going to be
> "change" stories - it is a story about a specifical technological
> advancement in Fedora that we are featuring, showing off in greater depth,
> etc.
>
> Honestly, I think the fine line here is that "changes" may be things that are
> system-wide changes, per the change set list; whereas oftentimes
> "self-contained changes" are more likely to be features we might highlight
> in a more in-depth fashion. There aren't any hard rules about what we pick
> and choose, or what buckets they need to fall into, or about what we might
> call them; it is our job, in marketing, to produce materials that inform and
> attract audience to download and try out an alpha, beta, or final release. I
> just happen to think that calling them "Features" or "Highlights" insinuates
> more about "the cool things you will find," where "changes" seems to imply a
> greater depth than we would be covering in a release announcement.
>
>
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > jzb
> > --
> > Joe Brockmeier | Open Source and Standards, Red Hat
> > jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
> > Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
> > --
>
> Fair points, all. I rescind my objection to the term, and thank you for the
> lesson :)
I will say though that I think that it would be okay for docs and marketing to diverge on the terminology depending on what the end written thing is; it might make more sense for something like release notes or other documentation to actually have things spelled out as changes.
>
> --Pete
>
> --
> docs mailing list
> docs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/docs
10 years, 7 months
Re: F20 Alpha announcement & release notes
by Joe Brockmeier
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 11:46:33AM -0600, Pete Travis wrote:
> If we are discussing Changes, we should call them Changes. The word
> "feature" is natural in this context, but carries with it the connotation
> of the now-defunct Features process. I have a similar tendency to use the
> word "runlevel" for example, and make a conscious effort to use "target" as
> the correct term.
How many of the folks in the audience have any awareness of the
distinction between "features" and "changes" in this context? I want to
make sure we're not getting bogged down with inside baseball.
> The Changes process in and of itself is a notable organizational
> accomplishment. I see no value in obscuring our process for the sake of
> using the familiar and overloaded "feature." Let the readers find it
> strange if need be; it is a new thing, and this is the way of all new
> things.
I think it's better for the minority of Fedorans who are actively
involved to have to cope with less specific language in general
communications than to "let the readers find it strange."
Not sure that the difference between changes/features is enough to
really throw readers, but in general communications I think we should
always bow to the larger audience.
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier | Open Source and Standards, Red Hat
jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
10 years, 7 months
