Re: When do we update the homepage to a modern design? (was Re: Moving away from (unsupportable) FusionForge on Alioth)
Steffen Möller writes ("Re: When do we update the homepage to a modern design? (was Re: Moving away from (unsupportable) FusionForge on Alioth)"):
> And there is a confusion over "dynamic web sites" (maybe problematic)
> with "non-static content" (must have).
I don't know what these terms mean. I see four kinds of ways in which
a website might be `dynamic' as opposted to `static':
* Content which is updated fairly frequently and relates to recent
events, such as news stories, blog posts, and testimonials.
I have no objection to this kind of thing and I can see how it
might make our website seem more exciting.
* Websites which reorganise themselves through CSS and/or JavScript
to try to produce a better selection of visibloe bits depending on
the screen size.
I find these mildly annoying, but I don't use a smartphone and
apparently smartphones are terrible at laying out ordinary web
pages (because wtf?). I don't really object to this kind of
approach so long as all features remain accessible (perhaps through
extra clicks) even on small screens, and there is sensible fallback
if JavaScript and/or CSS are not supported.
* Websites with elements which, when you move the mouse, pop up
menus, change shape or colour, etc. etc. I find these intensely
irritating. Often they are buggy too.
* Websites with elements which move even when you don't touch the
computer. This is an outrage - an outrage, I tell you! That
web browsers even honour this kind of thing by default is a
travesty. Rant rant rant.
Can some webby person please tell me the conventional names for these
four levels of dynamism ?
> We should vividly demonstrate on our home page that we are just that -
> alive and developing. If we could have users contribute success stories
> like "I switched my Granny from Windows to Debian and she likes it" or
> "We autoconfigure our HPC cluster in the cloud with Debian and Ansible,
> saving us 30 grand this year" then we have enough to get people hooked
> and invest to dig deeper into the site, I tend to think.
That sounds like it would be nice, but it shouldn't take away from the
navigation parts of our site. We have a lot of information; the
problem I find is that it can be difficult to find.
Ian.
Reply to: