[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Website Designs

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 16:03:20 +0200, Gerfried Fuchs <alfie@ist.org> said: 

> * Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@ieee.org> [2007-04-26 08:14]:
>> If accessibility is a goal, how are you certain we are not meeting
>> it? The web site has no javascript I can discern, it is localized in
>> my language, it uses no flash, it is accessible y braille terminals.
>> Have we not already met the goals, then?

>  I'm sure you have heard it somewhere before already, but: "There's
> always room for improvement."  "If you reach your goal you are dead."

>> If there are parts of the goals that are not met, can you point me to
>> concrete shortcomings? And why can't just those shortcomings be
>> answered, rather than a redesign from the ground up?

>  If there wouldn't be any shortcomings then how would you explain the
> regular mails about people getting lost in the links?  About not
> finding what they are looking for?  Like, "Getting Debian" sounds poor
> to me, and when you actually follow that page you get to a page where
> you can't get Debian but rather have a longish explenation about the
> different approaches, and when you decided you just want to download
> the damn thing and click you are again at the next hop with longish
> explenations about netinst, jigdo and stuff.

        Thanks. This is indeed a concrete step -- making it easier to
 access the ISO and jigdo images, and perhaps a _short_ explanation of
 the benefit of the latter. I see it more as  fixing a bug, rather than
 something that needs a redesign of the site with mockups (the
 navigation can be fixed without really doing a full redesign).

>> Does anyone have _any_ idea what the goals of the redesign are?

>  Improvement of navigation is definitely one that I hope to see in it.
> And with some design tricks this can be quite easily and especially
> effective be enhanced.  Of course, it might not be easily enhanced for
> every accessibility needing person, but that doesn't mean we can't do
> things for a lot (as long as we don't make it worse for the others).

        I agree with fixing issues with site navigation.  I would like
 to help in that.

>> this raises concerns that the whole effort is doomed to failure --

>  Right, everything can fail.  And quite a lot things do.  And did in
> history.  That doesn't mean that _trying_ to put some effort in is a
> failure, rather the contrary.  Like history showed.

        You elided the bit about where not knowing the target audience
 is why I thought it would fail.

        One of the initial ideas thrown about was to optimize the site
 for the "lambda user".  While not a goal I agree with, at least there
 the target audience was better defined

It is more rational to sacrifice one life than six. Spock, "The Galileo
Seven", stardate 2822.3
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: