[squeakland] on having two squeakland websites
Rita Freudenberg
rita at isg.cs.uni-magdeburg.de
Wed Sep 2 16:35:50 EDT 2009
Am 02.09.2009 um 20:06 schrieb Timothy Falconer:
>
> On Sep 2, 2009, at 11:46 AM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>
>> On 02.09.2009, at 16:45, Timothy Falconer wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> A few people have been suggesting that Squeakland should have two
>>> websites, the "official" site we have now, and a new "community"
>>> website with a different look & navigation scheme.
>>
>> As we discussed before on etoys-dev, we are talking about
>> separating the redacted content from the community contributed
>> content. I suggested this can run on the same system, it would just
>> be a different visual theme.
>>
>> This would make it obvious to visitors if they are on the
>> "official" or the "community" pages.
>>
>> Maybe I shouldn't have said "community site" before and "community
>> section" instead - but the surrounding discussion should have made
>> the intent clear.
>
>
> My apologies if a separate site was never desired by you, Rita, or a
> few others. I'm responding not just to recent discussions on etoys-
> dev, but many, many talks within the last year, where a separate
> site seemed wished for. It's possible that repeated use of terms
> like "project server" and "community site" simply helped to create
> this impression, along with resistance to the new showcase given
> superswiki2 and michael's system.
>
> I'm surprised to hear "we only meant a new skin". I've heard
> requests for special functionality, and frustration with the
> existing site, and a desire for a different navigation structure for
> the community site, which all led to my assuming a "separate garden"
> was desired. (I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that came to the
> same conclusion.)
My apologies for being not clear enough on what I mean. I'm really
glad that we talk about the topic now, because to have it written down
will make everything more transparent. I wasn't sure on which of the
emails I should respond, I will refer to the other mails from here.
First thing: my main concern is user experience. Everything I propose
or request is because I think it is useful for our community and our
users. So to have two different "sections" does not refer to different
servers. Bert did explain what I mean on his mail, so I will not
repeat it here.
>
> The clearest way to proceed is with specifics. Say exactly what
> you want, with details. What is the difference in look? Do we
> still have the same "chrome" (logo and nav), but with different
> colors? Does the new section/site have different top-level
> sections? What exactly is different?
I think about difference in look (doesn't have to be *that* different,
but distinguishable from the "official" section). So of course we
should have our logo there. But the navigation will not be the same.
The whole reason for two sections is, that they will serve different
purposes.
The official section is about first impression (your elevator pitch,
Tim!, great projects, news), guidance (courseware, relations to
curriculum, documentation etc.) and professionalism (for potential
sponsors etc.), and therefore the squeakland website is very good!
The community section is all about involvement, sharing and getting to
know eachother. It is more like a gathering place. Therefore I think
we need some new ideas for structuring the pages. I don't want to add
the functionality to the existing navigation structure because it will
become to much. So my ideas for the community section:
There will always be the link back to the official section, and we can
keep some of the navigation from the official section in the community
section (forums for example, surely more). But we need navigation
links for all the functionality which will be special on the community
section (typical social network stuff, in fact, what Marta wrote up in
her Email some time ago and what you can see here: http://wiki.squeakland.org/display/sq/Project+Server+discussion)
:
- log in to the community section to create or change your own profile
- find other users ( their profiles, projects or just people with like
interests or from the same country etc.)
- upload your projects, but every project you like to share without
having to worry about quality
- tags
- easy ways to give feedback, like comments on projects
- users can become more involved by getting more and more control over
the community section
>
> Also, please elaborate on why you think this needs to be done. If
> possible, cite other examples where such an approach was beneficial
> (and where the separation wasn't just a matter of the corporate
> marketing wonks wanting to make sure that their message wasn't
> confused with the community stuff.)
The distinction would be between "guidance" - "exploration" or
"controlled by Squeakland Foundation" - "controlled by the community".
And like you wrote in your other mail, Tim, I also like to have it
written down somewhere. It will make further discussion much easier
and hopefully prevent misunderstanding better.
Greetings,
Rita
>
> At this point, I can't see the need for it . . . it feels like it'd
> lead to confusion, or at least an inconsistent split, complicating
> the nav struture and sense of place ... the featured showcase would
> behave nearly identically with public showcase, but it'd look
> different and have a different navigation structure.
>
> Show me what I'm missing. The best way to do this is with an HTML
> mockup or napkin drawing or balsamiq mockup (or Etoys project :)
>
> Take care,
> Tim
>
> _______________________________________________
> squeakland mailing list
> squeakland at squeakland.org
> http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland
Rita Freudenberg
rita at isg.cs.uni-magdeburg.de
More information about the squeakland
mailing list