Re: Alternate PostgreSQL.org Design

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Gavin M. Roy wrote:

> Since this design is "drop-in" ready requiring only minor changes, perhaps we
> should resurrect the idea of a vote (maybe on Advocacy).  Any thoughts on
> that?

Once change to the new design has to be made before it can be drop'd in,
and the banner has to be added to the right menu like it is on the new
design ...

  >
> Gavin
>
> Dave Page wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org
>>> [mailto:pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Robert Treat
>>> Sent: 12 November 2004 15:08
>>> To: Dave Page
>>> Cc: Omar Kilani; pgsql-www@postgresql.org
>>> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Alternate PostgreSQL.org Design
>>>
>>> please note I am dropping -advocacy from this discussion since I need some
>>> focus on www work
>>>
>>
>> Good call.
>>
>>
>>> One problem I have with Lukasz design is that some of the subsection
>>> really scream out for second level navigation.
>>> In Lukasz design, we end up re-propogating the right nav bar on every page
>>> which I think is bad because it uses a lot of screen real estate while
>>> adding little/no substance to the secondary pages. For example, do we
>>> really need a link to external community sites on every page?
>>> In something like the "Overview" section, I would like to add in content
>>> like case studies, gui tools, advantages, and other sections from advocacy
>>> and techdocs websites, but this mean putting all of these subsections on
>>> the main "overview" page, creating a long scrolling lists that have to be
>>> gone through to find content. I think it is easier for people to scroll
>>> short lists of subcategories in a left hand nav like in the "About"
>>> section of the tinysofa design.
>>> These underlying structural issues need to be addressed regardless of what
>>> design we use.
>>
>> Yes, agreed.
>>
>>
>>>> 2) What happens if xyz web design comes and offers us another great
>>>> design next week. Do we start again? Where/when do we draw
>>> the line?
>>>> If I'm honest, based on our agreement to use Lukasz' design I think that
>>>> line should be drawn already.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> If we agree that there are some underlying structural issues, then either
>>> that needs to be addressed in the current design, or we need to swap. I
>>> understand that we don't want to just toss Lukasz' work out the window,
>>> but if we were developing an application and we found flaws in some piece
>>> of it, and someone else coded up an alternative implementation, I don't
>>> think we would discount the new idea simply on the grounds that we already
>>> have an existing implementation.
>>
>> Hmm, I don't think it's quite the same as a code issue though, as it's a
>> lot more subjective. I see what you mean though.
>>
>>
>>> (In fairness, the new design also has some structural issues, like fixed
>>> width, that would also have to be addressed before we could use it)
>>
>> Also agreed.
>> I should add that I do actually quite like this design, at least as much
>> as Lukasz'.
>> Regards, Dave
>>
>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
>>    (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
>              http://archives.postgresql.org
>

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664