On 15/01/2018 12:11, Tim Chown wrote:
On 15 Jan 2018, at 11:50, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Stephane,
At 01:16 AM 15-01-2018, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
Again, not a good reason. The old site had no obvious problem, there
was no compelling reason to change. If "it was done by volunteers,
work or shup up" is the rule, I will start to submit random patches to
the Linux kernel and reply to all criticisms by "I'm a volunteer, shut
up".
The text which you quoted might be the rule for the work done by some "groups". If a person is doing some work for free and does not derive any direct or indirect benefit from that work, how would that person react if he/she received a flood of extremely unpleasant comments? That does not mean that there cannot be any criticism.
The design brief from Torchbox Ltd states that "The site's aesthetic will draw inspiration from" www.gov.uk. In my opinion, the new website does not come even close to that. I clicked on a few links and I got a few 404s. I can think of a few ways to try and avoid such an issue before a site goes into production.
It would be nice if it did look like www.gov.uk; lots of easy to see and read links readily available without scrolling.
The gov.uk site is underpinned by some great work on open data.
Tim
Normally people go to www.gov.uk to do a task. The assumption is that
you sort of understand what the UK government is and want to use its
services for some reason. The site provides a list of links to more
detailed areas to allow you do do something you need to do, for example
tax your car. So if we replaced the top level page at www.ietf.org with
www.ietf.org/links then we would get the look and feel of www.gov.uk
together with its practicality.
- Stewart