[ckan-discuss] CKAN for humans?

[Lucy Chambers]

I agree with the sentiment that it would be great to make CKAN more
easy to understand for the non-techies / first time users.

Would it be worth pulling together some keen bodies for a
Skype-brainstorming call on how we might go about this?

Lucy

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Seb Bacon <seb.bacon at okfn.org> wrote:
> It's certainly OK that other tools are used, I agree :)
>
> On the other hand, I think it's vital that we make CKAN a bit easier
> to understand for the less determined visitor.  Conversations I've
> been having have made it clear that it's hard for a casual visitor to
> begin to understand what CKAN is about.  This should change.
>
> On a related note, it would be good to try to start towards living up
> to the "Comprehensive" part of the name; we should perhaps have a
> project development strand whereby we attempt to import the metadata
> for many of the sources you've pointed to.
>
> Seb
>
>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Tim McNamara
>> <paperless at timmcnamara.co.nz> wrote:
>>> Does CKAN need to be more accessible to humans? Or is it okay that people
>>> use other tools?
>>
>> It's not only OK ... it's in the nature of data publishing on the web.
>> The fact that people will use other tools should guide the design and
>> future evolution of CKAN. I'm not entire sure what that means, but I
>> thought I'd throw it out there :-)
>>
>> //Ed
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ckan-discuss mailing list
>> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-discuss
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ckan-discuss mailing list
> ckan-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-discuss
>



-- 
Lucy Chambers
Community Coordinator
Open Knowledge Foundation
http://okfn.org/
Skype: lucyfediachambers