On 2/21/06, Karl Guertin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 2/21/06, Richard (koorb) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > All honest comments are welcome. Take a look at it without CSS too, I > > would very much appreciate critique on accessibility, usability, and > > standards-compliance. (heres looking at you nerkles!) > > What was wrong with the design everybody agreed on? Why did the site > have to get web 2.0 bandwagon-ified?
I'm curious what you mean by web 2.0 bandwagon-ified.. if you're referring to the content on the page, I guess that's a bandwagon we jumped on a while ago. (Or, at least, I jumped on that a while ago, since I wrote that content for the current front page.) I actually like this design because: * the download box, while maybe a little too big, is striking and interesting * the two columns below that box are useful and attractive * the header is a nicer size * there's a documentation link :) The one thing I don't like about it is the column on the left. While I think it's a useful idea, the implementation feels crowded. There also needs to be something in the "Learning Fast" column that amounts to "How will TurboGears make me a rock star?" (How will TurboGears speed my development? -- a rephrasing of "what the hell is a TurboGears?") Kevin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
