> The STT team MUST ONLY improve the BASICS of the current site. That is,
> improve the links contained on the current files, and not move them.

That's the plan.

> > The LTT will look at where we want to be, ideally, in six months time, and
> > work towards implementing that. This could include (for example)
> > prototyping in various different site-management engines, working towards
> > total page standards-compliance or implementing an FTP-to-CVS gateway.
> 
> We have not yet managed to settle on any one plan for URLs or for
> filesystem structure, nor for which doctype to use, or whether to use
> tables. The chances of us getting around to implementing stuff other
> than a redesign and re-organisation is fairly minimal. 

That's what I said in the beginning, but loads of people disagreed with me
:-) Hence, the LTT is the chance for them to put their money on the table.

> I'll go for the LTT personally, since I don't believe the STT team
> should really devote resources to a dead-duck.

"If it's better tomorrow, it's worth doing".

Gerv

Reply via email to