Andreas Franke wrote:
>...
> I found your post at
> http://www.geocrawler.com/lists/mozilla/Mozilla/114/0/
> but couldn't find it on n.p.m.documentation.
>...
> FROM: Matthew Thomas
>...
> If a Webmaster feels the need to give a site a site map (or a
> `systematic reference directory', for that matter), the site's
> navigation is generally too broken for a site map to be of any
> help. You shouldn't have to refer to a map on the `information
> superhighway' any more than you have to refer to a map on a real
> highway -- the road signs (whether they be overhead at the top of
> the page, or on the kerb at the side of the page:-) should be
> enough.
>...
> Point taken. But please remember that this is a
> _short-term_ project. I think you're free to help
> fixing the main navigation.
Yes, and I will, as soon as I get sorted hardware-wise. But there are
three dangers in embarking on a short-term project like this one.
Firstly, it will break site users' memories for where particular pages
are located navigation-wise, only for them to be broken again later when
the long-term site debogosification project goes live.
Secondly, since the proposed temporary categories don't (seem to) map
entirely onto existing pages on mozila.org, they will result in the
creation of more temporary URLs that will probably rot later.
And thirdly, there will be a risk of complacency -- of thinking that the
temporary recategorization is `good enough', and that future
debogosification is not necessary.
>...
> I still haven't been able to improve on the six categories I came
> up with last year:
> * about the project (mission, history, credits)
> * news and events (recent site updates, milestones, developer
> meetings, parties, press releases)
> * software (links to distributions)
> * support (FAQs, links to newsgroups
> * get involved (hacking guide, intro to QA, documents which need
> to be written/translated)
> * developer center (specifications, test suites and results,
> code overviews).
>...
> You don't mention documentation in your proposal.
> Where would it go?
It wouldn't, since `Documentation' is a meaningless category
<http://groups.google.com/groups?q=x&seld=950494232&ic=1>.
> And since the pages for the for most of the items
> you mention don't fit your description in their
> current form, may I ask you to draft a proposal
> for each of them?
>...
No -- because you were there, participating in the thread, when I
already did that. :-P
http://groups.google.com/groups?th=a399aa07ae3bd621&seld=947624252&ic=1
--
Matthew `mpt' Thomas, usability weenie
