[Osmf-talk] site

Tom Hughes tom at compton.nu
Tue Dec 20 12:52:22 UTC 2011

On 20/12/11 12:45, Tom Hughes wrote:
> On 20/12/11 12:41, Tom Chance wrote:
>> Here it is in more detail: I would suggest you work with the Strategic
>> and Communication working groups to shortlist the entries, trying to
>> pull some criteria or considerations that attract consensus from these
>> email threads to inform that decision and documenting those
>> criteria/considerations on the wiki for transparency. Then put the logo
>> and web site design shortlists to the vote for the Foundation members,
>> and if the Board and working groups are happy then the Operational
>> Working Group can work with you on implementing the decisions. The vote
>> should probably include a "status quo" option for those who feel we
>> shouldn't change either/both the logo and the web site design.
> It would actually be up to EWG to implement the design. OWG would only
> be involved to the extent that any redesign required extra hardware
> resource.

This probably needs some clarification - strictly speaking EWG are not 
responsible for implementing because we/they don't have a cadre of crack 
developers waiting for orders.

A more accurate version is that EWG would have to encourage people to 
implement it and support them as necessary.

Then any operational issues (though server sizing is the most likely) 
that the deployment of that redesign might involve would be down to the 
OWG to coordinate.


Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list