On 23 May 2001 18:43:52 -0400, Michael Spunt wrote: > Hi! > > On Wed, 23 May 2001 17:13:54 +0200 Christoph Rauch > <christoph.rauch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I have updated my lists at http://home.bn-paf.de/smokey/gimp_org/ > > It would be great if we could get all that uncertainty out of them. > > :-)) > > We must know what we want to have as the result and how to get there. > > One point I have to criticise: > "...* No so important ones: 1. Netscape 2. IE..." > > The web-site should look perfect in every browser, also there are many > Windows users and people who use Windows at the office / internet café > :-) etc. Any discussions about which browsers must be supported more / > less are no good IMHO. > I agree. And sometimes it is useful to use Lynx (slow link, or to fit the window next to the Gimp stuff) Even rather complex table hack can be made nice in a text browser (go see www.ximian.com with Lynx to see what I mean) CSS works okay if done right. www.linux.com is a pretty good example of this - Garrett knows his stuff really well. > Anyway, here are my votes on different topics (see also my mockup): > > layout: > 1. layout - appearance - clean and cool, the current color map is not > that bad, consequent "theme" > 2. in-detail design - a set of icons is required to mark special news, > sections... see above > 3. a logo is nice, should contain Wilber > 4. navigation structure should be changed (see my mockup) There should be one designer (or a few working closely together) that does the look I think, design by committee has never worked well. But there is a lot of work needed in other areas as well, like the content structure, how to do the navigation etc. But the first thing to think about is NOT how it looks. It is what we want to put there, what the users need, and how to organize it nicely so it will serve the needs of the users and the Gimp project. Once we have some serious stuff done on that area, I can even see if could put some "free time" aside for doing the look, if you want. > 1. dynamic - php/*sql - easy to code, offers many possibilities, we use > it at the GUG and it's excellent for those purposes IMHO Beware that PHP can get slow under heavy load if you dont do it right. It is very easy to have all kinds of stupid spaghetti tricks there, as well as get lost in the table labyrinth when you include stuff a lot. It is easy to generate static pages via Cron if it becomes a problem though. ("snarf http://www.gimp.org/dynamic.html static.html") Tuomas -- .------------------------------------------------. | Tuomas Kuosmanen | Ximian | Art Director | | tigert@xxxxxxxxxx | www.ximian.com | `------------------------------------------------'
