Re: Intermediate Summary: Re: GNUstep.org website redesign proposal

[Richard Frith-Macdonald]

On 7 Jan 2014, at 12:16, Niels Grewe <address@hidden> wrote:

> (Sorry, forgot to CC the list)
> 
> Anfang der weitergeleiteten Nachricht:
> 
>> Von: Niels Grewe <address@hidden>
>> Betreff: Re: Intermediate Summary: Re: GNUstep.org website redesign proposal
>> Datum: 7. Januar 2014 13:00:12 MEZ
>> An: David Chisnall <address@hidden>
>> 
>> 
>> Am 07.01.2014 um 12:06 schrieb David Chisnall <address@hidden>:
>> 
>>> On 7 Jan 2014, at 10:49, Richard Frith-Macdonald <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> I read 'Objective-C 2' as 'we support the features Apple introduced in 
>>>>> 2005!  Yay!'
>>>> 
>>>> You may be unusual in that.
>>> 
>>> Possibly, but the 2006 WWDC was the first and last time Apple referred to a 
>>> set of new Objective-C features as Objective-C 2.  The term Objective-C 2 
>>> does not appear in current Apple docs,
>> 
>> <nitpicking>
>> That’s not quite true: Some of the documents still talk about something 
>> called "Objective-C 2.0“, most notably the runtime programming guide:
>> 
>> https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/Cocoa/Conceptual/ObjCRuntimeGuide/Articles/ocrtVersionsPlatforms.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40008048-CH106-SW1
>> </nitpicking>
>> 
>> But that doesn’t make the term any more intelligible. I think we should 
>> prefer to use a concise description of the feature set over any marketing 
>> mumbo jumbo. 

I sympathise/agree with that ... but we have, on the website , a consice 
description of what gnustep is, and yet just had Doc O'Leary complaning because 
we didn't have a marketing mission statement.

Probably we need both ... a good description and a marketing phrase to refer to 
it.