Taking a look at the post-1.0 Rails site, you can see that it's about
as un-crowded as it gets, and yet it's pretty effective. I do think
that having a dynamic page that shows what's going on in the project
at a glance is a good thing, and I also think that screen real estate
can be used a little better to highlight special things (like the
current turbogears.org's sidebar, which is not always used to
full-effect).
I agree that a dynamic page to show some current goings-on is very
useful, but I am not sure that the front page is necessarily the best
place for that. In fact, I know its not the best place for that.
Take a look at the very well designed Ruby on Rails page. Its a case
study in well-designed and well thought out web sites. The first
thing you see is a high level overview of what Rails is. This puts
an idea in your head that immediately leads to a question ("how can I
get this?", "how can I learn more?", "how can I improve at this?",
"how can I get involved?").
The very next thing you see on the page is an answer to those
questions ("Get Excited", "Get Started", "Get Better", "Get
Involved"). These are clearly ordered by level of commitment,
starting by drawing you in with screencasts and marketing hype,
moving on to getting you started, then to getting you committed, and
finally to getting you involved in the project itself. The remainder
of their page (below the fold, if you will) focuses on answering high
level questions, and is entirely about marketing.
Its no accident that Rails is so successful with this web site. It
does exactly what a home page should do: tells you what its for,
draws you in, and directs you on to where you want to go. Perfect.
I think Richard's latest layout is perfect, both in terms of color
and whitespace. Its easy to read, attractive, and not too full of
graphics.
Can you be more specific when you say "Richard's latest layout"?
http://koorb.co.uk/static/images/tglogos/layouts/layout-1.png
http://koorb.co.uk/static/images/tglogos/layouts/layout-2.png
http://koorb.co.uk/static/images/tglogos/layouts/layout-3.png
I think layout three is the most attractive and layout one has the
best content in the main content area. I think mostly what I like
about Richard's layouts though is the way they look: not necessarily
what is shown in the content section. See my little rant above for
more about what should be on the home page :)
If I had to pick, I would say layout three, minus the sidebar.
layout 3 has a gray band at the right that is screaming out for
*something* to happen there.
Very true, and I think that sidebars area a great place for dynamic
features that link off to other more dynamic places (recent news,
recent checkins, recent discussions, etc.) since sidebars are
intended for secondary information. If done properly, they are a way
to sneak secondary information onto the front page. However, I would
be perfectly satisfied if all dynamic and secondary content was
relegated to a secondary *page*, but thats just my Usability and
Information Architecture training showing through :) Keep that home
page focused!
That is specifically what I disliked about the other layouts: they
were made up of almost entirely secondary information. Most of that
information should be banished from the front page, and relegated to
another place. This has the benefit of keeping both of those things
focused: the home page serves its purpose better, and the other tasks
serve their purpose better.
I would suggest that Kevin make an executive decision, and pick a
layout that he likes for the color scheme and general design, and
then we can focus on the content afterwards.
--
Jonathan LaCour
http://cleverdevil.org
