J Aaron Farr wrote:
On Wed, 2003-10-01 at 19:05, Stephen McConnell wrote:
[resending - original post send around 24 hours ago]
So, thoughts?Big improvement over current home page. Will menus be expandable or is this
a flat structure? Which tool are you using?
Planning on them to be expandable (but will still focus on simplicity).
Currently using Forrest.
Comments?
Left Menu Content -----------------
Under Project:
- the "License" submenu could be moved under "Resources"
- Who We Are can be merged with Community
Under Product:
- Break "Containers" into two entries - "Fortress" and "Merlin"
- Sandbox should be moved to Resources (its not product)
- Related should be moved to Resources
All these sound good.
I was planning on having Fortress and Merlin links expand into view when
clicking on the containers link.
That's what I would have done as well. Although I would use the term "Containment" instead of "Containers".
Under Documetation:
- API should be removed (apis should be provided under each product)
Wasn't sure about this. Some times I like having all the API available, but it often seems out dated.
I find the consolidated version to be too much information. Providing we are consistent with links in all product javadoc then problem dissapears because you can easily navigate to whatever you want within the javadoc.
General comments:
-----------------
1. either kill "Avalon Main" on the left or "Home" on the right.
2. too much visual noise in the header - i.e. one of the logos
should go
3. remove "Sandbox" from the horizontal menu - keep focus on products
I'll try these out and see how they work.
4. horizontal menu items should be either brand *or* group
E.g.: brand breakdown:
"Fortress", "Merlin", "Cornerstone", "Excalibur", "Framework"
E.g.: group breakdown:
"Containment", "Components", "Utilities", "Framework"
This was a big debate of mine -- project names vs. groups. I think it could go either way. I like Cornerstone and Excalibur better than Components and Utilities because if you don't introduce the names to the users early on, it just adds confusion. I like Containers because we have merlin, fortress and phoenix and who knows what will be there in a year or two. The Containers page would be a good place to explain the differences between the projects. Links to individual containers could go on from there.
This was a big debate for me as well!
I think we should be structuring to present Avalon as a solution. A single containment platform, a set of components, and some utilities. The containment platform is today represented by a framework contract, a meta model, and multiple container implementations. As we move forwards we should see the elimination of multiple containers. What this means is that Avalon becomes "a service management platform" as distinct from a place to find products X, Y or Z. While I recognize that this is a bit jump from what we have today, I think it's the right jump to make - Avalon - a single product.
The immediate challenge is to structure the product picture in a way that makes it clear that things like Phoenix, Fortress, and Merlin are just snapshots on the way to delivery of Avalon. From that perspective - the product breakdown of Avalon maps down to the framework, the meta model, and common containment facilities, and for the time-being, a set of current solutions.
A view of the product breakdown today:
Product
+ Avalon Containment
+ Fortress
+ Merlin
+ Phoenix
+ Avalon Framework
+ Avalon MetaA view of the product breakdown I would like to see (under which Avalon is the name of a single product and the name of a single community - much like Ant).
Product
+ Avalon Distribution
+ Notification
+ Management
+ Discovery
+ Avalon Containment
+ Repository
+ Composition
+ Activation
+ Security
+ Avalon Framework
+ Avalon Meta
In the end though, I want one naming scheme that is consistently used throughout the site.
Yep - agree 100%.
Cheers, Steve.
Criticisms?IMVHO its too visually busy (but I think resolvable by removing one of
the logos).
I'll try it and we'll see how it looks. What does everyone else think about dropping a logo? I kinda like the style of the old Avalon logo, but Avalon has sort of grown beyond just the Apache Server Framework.
--
Stephen J. McConnell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
