On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Matthew
Toseland<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Saturday 13 June 2009 20:01:18 Evan Daniel wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Matthew
>> Toseland<[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Probably worth moving forward on this? Submenus are important, we have a 
>> > lot of content and it's not well organised. And arguably the theme is 
>> > better, and arguably even if it isn't better it's a change, and is no 
>> > worse...
>> >
>> > On Monday 01 June 2009 01:24:24 Clément wrote:
>> >> Hello all,
>> >>
>> >> about three weeks ago I had a HCI webproject to do.
>> >> The subject was : improve an existant website (well, I'm not 100% sure 
>> >> that it
>> >> was the subject, but that what we've done)
>> >>
>> >> I convinced the three other people who worked with me to work on the 
>> >> freenet
>> >> website. It was a small project though (3 hours with a teacher in the 
>> >> room, +
>> >> 3 hours max of personal time), so we didn't go far.
>> >>
>> >> But maybe some of what we've done could be usefull for the project.
>> >>
>> >> Here is the copy/paste of what we've done :
>> >
>> > I like the submenus. I think that is fairly universal. New layout is fine. 
>> > I am not convinced about the way the site has been split up however. More 
>> > comment below...
>> >>
>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> Objective of the new website:
>> >> - To improve the existing navigation controls of freenetproject.org
>> >> - To improve it's structural presentation of information on home page
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Aim of the web-site:
>> >> - to present the software product and provide support
>> >> - documentation and tools to users and developers to allow them to use and
>> >> contribute to the software.
>> >>
>> >> Problems:
>> >> The problems of current website http://freenetproject.org :
>> >> - irrelevant information for homepage: mainly financial status, we don't 
>> >> know
>> >> what freenet is
>> >> - too many items in left navigation menu and not really well structured
>> >> - documentation section where subsections do not have direct hyperlinks - 
>> >> its
>> >> confusing
>> >>
>> >> Solutions we proposed:
>> >> - simpler horizontal navigation bar with restructured tree
>> >> - new menu tree proposition:
>> >>
>> >>         Home -- what is freenet a bit modified page
>> >
>> > This page looks good IMHO.
>> >>
>> >>         About freenet:
>> >>                 what is freenet
>> >>                 philosophy
>> >>                 contributors
>> >>
>> >>         Downloads:
>> >>                 freenet
>> >>                 tools
>> >
>> > Tools are unofficial and unsupported. Maybe download should be under home?
>> >>
>> >>         Contribute:
>> >>                 papers -- research and stuff
>> >>                 developer
>> >
>> > I'm not convinced papers belong under Contribute.
>> >>
>> >>         Donations
>> >>                 donate
>> >>                 sponsors
>> >
>> > Ok. But shouldn't both be under Contribute?
>> >>
>> >>         Support & feedback
>> >>                 help --documentation and stuff
>> >>                 faq --move out from help section
>> >>                 mailing lists
>> >>                 suggestions
>> >
>> > What about the wiki? Shouldn't it be on the same level as the uservoice 
>> > tracker?
>> >
>> > How about:
>> >
>> > Home
>> > - Home
>> > - What is Freenet?
>> > - Download Freenet
>> >
>> > About:
>> > - Philosophy
>> > - Papers
>> > - People
>> >
>> > Contribute:
>> > - Developer page
>> > - Donate
>> > - Sponsors
>> >
>> > Help:
>> > - Docs
>> > - FAQ
>> > - Mailing lists
>> > - Suggestions
>> > - Wiki
>> >
>> > Too many links? Depends on the theme I guess...
>> >
>> > Actually, I'm not convinced we want to keep the documentation pages:
>> > - Install only applies to the java installer, needs some typo fixes and a 
>> > new final screenshot, and some guidance on the post-install wizard.
>> > - Connect: needs updating but is basically acceptable.
>> > - Content: dunno, isn't this more About? but i'm not sure we want to move 
>> > it there...
>> > - Understand: maybe keep
>> > - Freemail: probably keep, is sort of official
>> > - Frost: dunno, we don't ship it, and we don't review it, but at the 
>> > moment we recommend it ...
>> > - jSite: keep
>> > - Thaw: see Frost
>> > - FAQ: should be at a higher level
>> > - Wiki: should be at a higher level
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Devl mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
>> >
>>
>> IMHO the wiki should be made more prominent, with a top level link.
>>
>> Is there any reason the following shouldn't be wiki pages?
>> Current docs
>> FAQ
>> What is Freenet?
>> Papers
>> Philosophy
>> People
>
> They'd have to be locked, or they'd get vandalised during a release. And 
> vandalism here could be very nasty. Also, there might be performance issues, 
> although if we have a third party hosting our wiki it might not be a problem.

Locked might be overkill.  Allowing edits by non-new accounts would
probably work.

>
> OTOH, docs and FAQ would definitely make sense as wiki pages ... they would 
> still need menu items on the main site... If we use mediawiki, can we get 
> notifications by email when a page is changed? On wikipedia i think you have 
> to login to see such notices?

I don't know.  I don't see such an option in WP, but I don't know much
about the underlying software.

>>
>> I'm happy to volunteer to work on the wiki, but only if it is going to
>> be made prominent enough that new users are likely to see it.  Buried
>> under a submenu as it presently is, I feel that effort spent improving
>> it would be wasted because no one who needs the info would ever see
>> it.
>
> A long time ago the whole web site was a wiki. We abandoned it because the 
> devs never contributed to it. On the other hand, that was a long time ago, 
> and I think they are probably more likely to contribute now.
>
> Also, _some_ users won't know what a wiki is (reading wikipedia occasionally 
> doesn't mean you know what a wiki is!). So I dunno if having a top level item 
> for the wiki is a good thing. OTOH most documentation could be wikified.
>

Most users do, I think.  Our audience is fairly technically aware.
Avoiding it because of a minority of users won't know what it is
doesn't make sense to me.

Evan Daniel
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to