On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 10:27:49 +0200 Brian E Carpenter <brc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Marshall, > > Marshall Eubanks wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:37:50 +0200 > > Brian E Carpenter <brc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >>Edward Lewis wrote: > >> > >>>At 9:20 -0500 6/15/05, wayne wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>It is hard to get people to use tools when they don't know they exist > >>>>and are very hard to find. > >>> > >>> > >>>I'd like to add a me too to that and a few suggestions... > >>> > >>>I'd like to add that the datatracker be easier to find that having it > >>>"buried" under the IESG roster on the IESG page. I've referenced the > >>>datatracker a lot recently, more so that I thought I ever would. I > >>>think it ought to be up front on the IETF site (i.e., www.ietf.org), as > >>>this is the best indication of the current state of $topic-or-group. > >>> > >>>Another tool that I was alerted to that I find helpful is the draft > >>>"differ" at > >>> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/<wg name>/<draft name>/ > >>>If it weren't for my WG chair telling me this was being done, I would > >>>have never seen it for documents I am editing. > >> > >>It's well understood that the ietf.org site is hard to navigate and needs > >>substantial reorganisation. But this is a major project and will take > >>time to plan and implement. > >> > > > > > > Dear Brian; > > > > Since in a real way this is the public interface of the IETF (and since I have heard > > lots of complaints about it over the years), wouldn't it make sense to > > > > - specifically ask for public suggestions for improvements > > - have a BOF or an open house in Paris or Vancouver devoted to discussing this > > I agree that we need public comment before action. The challenge with > web design is that explaining what's wrong and what would be better is > very hard to do except in front of the screen. I'm not sure a BOF style > meeting would succeed. Also, I'm pretty sure we can't prepare for this > by Paris - it's resource constrained. I agree, and have no doubt that Paris is too soon. However, I also know that feature creep (add X to the front page, as in the title of this thread) is not really a good way to do web design - and that the IETF site is ripe for a re-design. I (like, I suspect, many others) basically use Google as my initial IETF resource for everything except meetings. (For example, when I first heard about IETF tools, I went to Google and rapidly found the tools site and a bunch more.) Google basically solves the forward problem (find out more about X), but it does little for the inverse problem (which set of X's should I know about), and this, IMHO, is what the IETF web site should assist with, and does not (much). This, of course, cannot be solved by hiring a fancy web design shop in Venice Beach or Soho and telling them to go to it, but will require thought and community input. Regards Marshall > > Brian > > > > > This was done in DC at IETF 61 for the IETF multicast video and it seemed to work well > > (multicast video of 2 rooms is now unicast audio of all rooms). > > > > Regards > > Marshall > > > > > > > >>You can in fact find the tools page off the IESG Activities/Actions > >>page, so it's only one level down. And I agree, that page is in need > >>of a clean-up. > >> > >>While we're talking, let me point to a recently created "operational > >>notes" page at http://www.ietf.org/u/ietfchair/opNotes.html > >>Comments welcome. That too is currently linked in an obscure place. > >>Nevertheless, Google found it in 0.38 seconds. > >> > >> Brian > >> > >> > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Ietf mailing list > >>Ietf@xxxxxxxx > >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > > > > _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf