X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7E443A4651 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:51:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 66112-06 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:51:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from tetra.ehpg.net (tetra.ehpg.net [216.218.206.34]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE613A44E3 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:51:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from adsl-67-122-138-49.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net ([67.122.138.49] helo=[172.16.1.35]) by tetra.ehpg.net with asmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CSedy-000371-1R; Fri, 12 Nov 2004 08:51:26 -0800 Message-ID: <4194E9FC.2050603@ehpg.net> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 08:51:08 -0800 From: "Gavin M. Roy" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Page Cc: Robert Treat , Omar Kilani , pgsql-www@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Alternate PostgreSQL.org Design References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200411/150 X-Sequence-Number: 5881 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? 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) > >