On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 05:31:47PM +0200, Martin Rex wrote: > Please get rid of the "social media" crap entirely. Strongly seconded. The IETF should not be aiding and abetting some of the world's worst security and privacy offenders; instead, it should be scrupulously avoiding using or advocating any of these mass surveillance/data acquisition operations, particularly in light of RFC 7258. Doubly so because some of them are chronic, relentless spammers who use web bugs to conduct even *more* surveillance and tracking. > All in all, my personal summary for https://beta.ietf.org/ > disgusting and extremly bloated, usless and highly confusing. I really want to be less harsh than this, but unfortunately I also strongly concur with this point: it's trendy-looking junk that's horribly overrun by enormous, pointless graphics. (I see zero reason for just about *any* graphics [1]: there's no functional need to accomodate illiterate people.) This is a horribly-bloated major downgrade from the current site and it should be discarded. It looks to me like far more like an exercise in ego-gratifying graphic design than an efficient, lightweight/minimal design intended for professional use by technical personnel. Economy and conciseness are particularly important to those who don't have the privilege of cheap high-speed connectivity and/or the wealth to pay the usurious rates charged by some ISPs. As the IETF seeks increased involvement and diversity around the world (a goal I strongly support) I think it's critical to ensure that the resources required for participation are kept minimal. I recommend rendering it in a text-only browser (e.g., w3m) to see what the page would look like when stripped down to functional essentials. There's about 5K of actual content plus 20K-ish of markup buried in about 1M of cruft: in other words, the page as it is right now is roughly 40X the size it needs to be to get the job done. That's ridiculous. Let me also note that passing that page through validators like tidy or the W3C validator yields quite a few errors and warnings. No, it's not necessary to obsessively clobber every last one of those, but a lot of them would just go away if all of the useless cruft was stripped out. ---rsk [1] Small, isolated, occasional exceptions -- let's say, a graph or an illustration -- might be acceptable. But they should probably be thumbnails that link to the actual image, so that only those who are interested in that particular item need to load it.