If the current site is so good (you're the first person I can remember who thinks the current site is good) then why did we even start _one and a half years ago_ the mozilla-reorg project? Why did noone object to the 2001 LTT and STT ideas? An observation that demonstrates that current site doesn't work for everyone: there are so many sites about Mozilla (for example mozilla-evengelism.bclary.com or mozdev.org, which hosts _documentation_ projects) that are not on mozilla.org
Personally I also think that not only mozilla developers (who know cvs for the most part) write material that should be on the website. Documents written will of course never be lost (unless they are desperately out of date). As to the fact that the new catalog damaged the old index pages of the site, I don't think I have ever been able to do anything about that. -Fabian. P.S: Sorry if I don't answer later posts, I'm leaving on vacations tomorrow for a while... L. David Baron wrote: > On Saturday 2002-07-06 22:31 -0400, fantasai wrote: > >>"L. David Baron" wrote: >> >>>I've spent a bit of time on the organization of pages on the existing >>>mozilla.org site, and those pages are now much more difficult to find >>>thanks to the docs link pointing to http://mozilla.org/catalog/ . >>> >>Take that up with ksosez. >> > > I did, or at least I tried. He didn't get the point of the basic > problem with his approach: that he's duplicating the organization of > pages that are written by the experts in the relevant areas rather than > just linking to them (e.g., http://mozilla.org/newlayout/doc/ or > http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/ ). He's also ignoring the fact > that he made these pages much less prominent without asking or even > notifying their maintainers, and without posting to a newsgroup any more > prominent than n.p.m.documentation. I was maintaining / helping to > maintain those sites as if they were prominent, only to discover later > that my time was wasted because they were no longer easy to find. > > >>It has nothing to do with whether we run UNIX or NT, CVS or Zope. >> > > It does have something to do with the idea of a "complete redesign" of > the website, which I'm against, and which seems to be what moz.zope.org > is. I don't see any good reason to throw the whole thing out and start > over -- there's been a lot of work put in to the existing site and it > would be a lot of work (more than I think the authors of moz.zope.org > will be willing to put in) to make a replacement as good as the current > one. I don't think catalog is as good as the existing docs/ hierarchy, > but somehow it managed to replace the existing hierarchy because it had > the "potential" to be a clearer organization, or something like that. > (Never mind that I find that type of UI awful because it's very hard to > scan lists that are spread across the page.) > > At this point I'm becoming hesitant to continue contributing to > documentation because I don't know if what I write will get thrown out. > > -David > >
