[Pydotorg-redesign] Next iteration (was "I think that the current site ....")

[Steve Holden]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pydotorg-redesign-bounces at python.org
> [mailto:pydotorg-redesign-bounces at python.org]On Behalf Of Tim Parkin
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 4:41 AM
> To: pydotorg-redesign at python.org
> Subject: RE: [Pydotorg-redesign] Next iteration (was "I think that the
> current site ....")
>
>
> Dylan:
> >
> > Amk:
> > > After some c.l.python discussion, here's a revised
> version of some
> > > tweaks to the current home page.
> >
> >But why are we tweaking this design?  Our web site needs far
> more than
> >any amount of incremental revision is likely to give it. Really, it's
> >long past time we took this old dog out behind the barn and shot it.
> I disagree, the old site is awful and realistically it's
> going to be end
> of the this year / start of next year before relaunching the new site.
> In the meantime, lets make the current site more useful. It's
> against my
> interests as the worse the current site looks, the better our redesign
> appears but I'll be altruistic about it ;-)
>
I agree that at the moment the web site redesign appears to be in limbo,
and applaud Andrew Kuchling's efforts to get going with an incremental
change rather than trying to do a complete job in the absence of any
guidelines. I'm glad to see you agree, Tim, as I think that could at
least get us moving in the right direction.

> Amk:
> >The redesign effort is looking increasingly like the types-sig to me.
> The
> >types-sig expended lots of discussion time on complicated
> questions and
> >*never* *produced* *anything*.
> I'm sure you didn't mean nothing as on my public folder alone there's
> 9.1Mb of proposed designs/information architecture notes and
> logos. Also
> on the wiki there's prototype html components and proposed navigation
> concepts. Here's the latest design if people haven't seen it.
> http://pollenation.net/assets/public/python-latest.png
>
Because we have a committee "in charge" of this activity I've kind of
backed off this, but I think there's an amazing collection of good ideas
been proposed in the last months, and I'm somewhat surprised that there
does seem to be a residual feeling in certain quarters that the existing
web site is "good enough" - it isn't. Notwithstanding the need for
textual navigation, we would be foolish to omit the appeal that good
graphical design can add.

I'm absolutely positive there has been no fundamental change to the
design in the last five years, and probably it goes back rather further
than that, and it looks like it. The content has grown well beyond the
ability of the site's architecture to direct the reader's attention to
the appropriate areas. In short, like my own current web site (which is
if anything even worse) it looks like a "geek" site, and it seems clear
that it isn't being organized with maximal reader convenience in mind.

> Amk:
> >Anyway, there's nothing preventing anyone from grabbing portions of
> >python.org with wget, making an improved prototype and putting it on
> some
> >random IP address. Fred even made a (somewhat controversial)
> tarball a
> >little while ago; that could be repeated.  So, make a prototype!
> Well.. There is one thing that is stopping me in particular which is a
> lack of official feedback on the design proposal. I don't
> mind spending
> a lot of time building a prototype but would like some sort of
> indication that :-
>
> a) We (myself and people on the design/redesign list) are on the right
> track
> b) If not, why not (and why hasn't it been mentioned)
> c) If so then what are the constraints in building html and for the
> platform and do we have a provisional "yes we'll use this
> design as long
> as it meets our requirements for accessibility/speed/etc"
>
Hear, hear! I've been loath to propose further ideas because they just
get sucked into the cauldron of indecision that is this mailing list.

> I for one would love to get going but, in order to do what I have done
> so far, I have had to make assumptions about what the PWC/Python Board
> want. In particular (but in no means an indicative or
> substantial part)
> the choice of how to support Netscape. I've had to presume
> Netscape 4.x
> will degrade to a text only type design in order to make the
> most of the
> massive advantages newer (post '98) version browsers can deliver.
>
> We also have put some thought into platform / administration
> IA etc but
> it seems risky carrying on without some buy-in from the PWC/Python
> Board. We'd love to build something useful using Zope (and we have
> addressed some of the concerns raised) but if it's a 100% no-no, then
> there is little point.
>
Yes, it would be nice to see some of the other talent that's on offer
being utilized to improve the situation.

> To be honest I am just carrying on under the assumption that the scale
> of feedback a project like this needs is unlikely and that,
> in addition,
> the PWC/Board are not going to make any commitment apart from a yes/no
> once they see a completed proposal. Moving the proposed web
> designs into
> a fully standards compliant and browser compatible state is a
> substantial (40+ hour) task to get perfect and I really can't
> afford to
> 'waste' that amount of time. And I do mean waste as, unlike
> python code,
> web development builds are extremely difficult to refactor.
>
Agreed.

> To be honest what worries me is carrying on and developing something
> with many 100's of hours of mantime invested in it only to be told
> "we're doing something else". That would not only upset me but would
> severely test my sanity and trust. Understanding this, I shouldn't
> really go any further as that isn't something I want to risk.
> However, I
> love Python and see a good future for it.
>
> What we really need is an official nod to say "great... we like... go
> and make some html!"
>
> What do you suggest?
>
> Tim (not disillusioned, just wary of one sided relationships)
>
Personally I think we need some goals, and I would think the committee
should be the group to provide them, but I know that they are all busy
people and I'm sure that their silence is attributable to overload
rather than lack of good intentions. The confusions and cross-posting
between pydotorg, pydotorg-redesign and marketing-python haven't helped,
either.

Guido's clearly too busy with other matters to put a hand on the tiller
here, but I'm sensing a vacuum that isn't helpful for people like Tim,
whose goodwill we need to nurture. Proposals are made, then commented
upon, but no decision are resulting, and no goals are available by which
to measure specific designs against published criteria.

Goals have certain characteristics: specifically, they should be SMART:

	S(imple)
	M(easurable)
	A(chievable)
	R(ealistic), and with a
	T(imescale)

So here's a sample goal as an "Aunt Sally". Would it help?

	The new web site design should allow reader to reach all existing
	content and provide a framework for the inclusion of new content. Any
	page should be reachable from the home page with no more than four
	mouse-clicks, and the more following sections should be more
accessible:

	1 click [name the most important areas]
	2 clicks [the next most important areas]
	3 clicks [stuff more important than the 1995 conference]

	Other than "leaf" content, navigational pages should not exceed 64 Kb
in
	content-length [we can argue about this - personally I'd go for 128
Kb].

	The redesign should be completed by October 31, and the content should
	be publicly available in the revised format by November 31.

There, now tell me to shut up. I'll get back to pycon-organizers for
another month :-)

regards
--
Steve Holden                                 http://www.holdenweb.com/
Python Web Programming                http://pydish.holdenweb.com/pwp/
Interview with GvR August 14, 2003       http://www.onlamp.com/python/