Tangible improvements to licensing and software info #41
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -82,6 +82,6 @@ | |
| $URL_WIKI="https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/"; | ||
|
|
||
| // some defaults for metatags in case the page does not set them | ||
| $default_title= T_("Copylefted Libre Software"); | ||
comradekingu marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
| $default_description= T_("<span class=\"gnucash\">GnuCash</span> is financial-accounting software for personal and small-business use. Freely licensed <a href=\"https://www.gnu.org/\">GPLv2+</a>. Available for GNU/Linux, BSD, Solaris, macOS and Windows."); | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. I was working on this, too.
Finaly I was replacing the markup parts by parameters. There was a problem hiding this comment. "Financial accounting" shouldn't be hyphenated. If you're going to change the dependent clause into a separate sentence then it needs a verb, e.g. The URI should match the term, so it should be "Windows" is not correct. "Microsoft Windows" is. There was a problem hiding this comment. One more thing: The commit summary is wrong. This changes mostly correct wording for other mostly correct wording. The new wording may or may not be more easily understandable to people for whom English is not their native language, but you're not correcting anything. There was a problem hiding this comment. All yes, except it is "GPLv2+" (now), not "GPL+", does your point still stand? There was a problem hiding this comment. "and later" is less ambiguous than "+". Windows.com redirects to Microsoft.com. Microsoft has agressively asserted for years that it owns the word Windows as a trademark, but got slapped down in court and settled. That hasn't stopped them from continuing to threaten. Wikipedia's lead article on the OS leads off with "Microsoft Windows, commonly referred to as Windows...". There was a problem hiding this comment. Microsoft.com is the older domain? What am I missing there? GnuCash could get sued for using "Windows" as a proper noun when Microsoft does so without specifying trademark? GnuCash in so doing isn't infringing on the likeness of the trademark, or even in the same business. It is what Windows wants to do, so why shouldn't it want GnuCash to do it? Is there an ethical consideration to be made here? It isn't actually "and later", it is "or later", at-least in the standard formatting of the license name https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0-or-later.html Wikipedia uses "+" I seem to remember https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LibreOffice There was a problem hiding this comment.
Probably, because Microsoft would have been in Arpanet before there would have been a reason to have a windows.com. That would have come along in the mid-to-late 90s when advertising on the WWW became a thing. Not sure that that's relevant. You're right, it should be "or later", not "and later". No, I don't think that Microsoft is going to pester us about using the word Windows to describe their OS. That's what they want. I prefer to make clear that there are other windowing operating systems by not using Windows by itself. But your comment about SEO led me to dig a bit deeper. I tried DuckDuckGo (because Google firmly associates my IP with GnuCash) searches for "free accounting software", "libre accounting software", "copyleft accounting software", and "gpl accounting software". www.gnucash.org was on the first page only for the last search. Google searches for the same terms present GnuCash on the same page for each. Google rearranges the title (which gets " | GnuCash" appended in header.phtml) to GnuCash: Free Accounting Software while DDG leaves it as Free Accounting Software | GnuCash. The default_description is placed both in the meta description and the first paragraph of index.phtml so it's not possible to tell which Google presents under the title, but DDG concats it with the first sentence of the second para ("Designed to be easy to use..."). Since more than 90% of web searches are on Google what they show is most important and they chop the current description after Mac OS. That means we have about 130 characters to sell searchers on clicking through so we should focus it on GnuCash features and (aside from it being free and cross-platform) push details like the laundry list of supported OSes to after the 130 characters. Since that laundry list will be used for harvesting search terms we absolutely want to say Apple macOS and Microsoft Windows so that the company names are included as search terms. Licensing details including terms like copyleft, free, and libre should also go in that part of the description. The meta title is used as the tab title too, progressively truncated depending on tab size. With the current title and around 10 tabs it's just the favicon and "Free". ISTM we want that to be GnuCash so that should be the first word rather than the last and "GnuCash Accounting" makes more sense than "GnuCash Free", never mind "GnuCash Copyleft".
comradekingu marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
| ?> | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this grade of relabeling should be done after discussion on the gnucash-devel mailing list. IANA
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not wild about "Copylefted Libre" to replace "Free". Just "Libre" would be better, "Free/Libre" is widely used and might be best of all. Regardless it should say what kind of Free/Libre software it is so "Accounting" should stay.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Whatever the order, I think they are all points to make (once).
It similarly already says "Freely licensed" below. I haven't seen Free/Libre anywhere I can think of. Not sure why it would be better.
It is possible to be copyleft without being libre (I think), and it is also something in addition to it, so that makes sense to point out in my head. Explanations along the line of "Use, see, change and share at will; with all." make sense to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You must not have looked very hard
Nope.
It is indeed, but that's of interest only to people who create derivative works and for them it's sufficient to say that GnuCash is licensed under the GPL.
Do you not understand that "Title" and "Description" are complimentary and the latter often repeats with more detail the former?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well I tried looking for it now, and couldn't find anything that isn't some variant of "FLOSS", or FLO… https://wiki.snowdrift.coop/about/free-libre-open
Maybe the point is esoteric, but there could for example be non-commercial copylefted works(?)
I would argue the requirement to share distributed derivative works is of interest to everyone it could benefit. It isn't saying everything is good or even beneficial to all if good in any capacity. The requirement in my view is in the interest of everyone at the level it benefits nobody in particular.
I do understand the relation of title/desc, but would rather keep all redundancy to a minimum and then clarify if need be. No clear inroads on getting to a salient point is being made here. The reader has to already be aware of the duality of "free", which is sure to get lost in translation as a further element to decipher. It adds a flowchart of possibilities rather than narrowing anything down, and that isn't explaining anything well. "Free" is right next to a bank card and some coins, so one would be excused for thinking it is only meant as a monetary point to make. Already "accounting" leads one to think in terms of financial gain or loss. That is my thinking anyway.
To Illustrate my near complete ineptitude, I don't even understand that there is some "accounting software" that isn't "financial" (in any way that would leave room for actual confusion). So that amounts to repetition without the panache of linguistic acuity to me.
If it is explained well, I think "copylefted libre software" is the bigger point to make. Right now it isn't even drowning out the idea of money being saved. "Welcome to GnuCash.org" prominent, when it doesn't really do much, or anything over just "Welcome".