Hi Christian, On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Christian Lohmaier <[email protected]> wrote: > [...] >> 3) For the footer, an expanded array of links like the footer of Mozilla.com > > Bad example, as what you see when visiting mozilla.com depends on the > language choice of your browser. > If I go to http://www.mozilla.com/en/ there is a sitemap above the > footer (with the same background as the footer, so maybe you mean > that) on http://www.mozilla.com/de/ however, ther's only the footer > > I'd vote -1 for such a huge sitemap as part of the general footer. On > the few entry pages: Yes, no complaints, but definitely not for all > pages. It just takes too much screen estate, especially when you think > about netbooks and the like.
The Mozilla footer is probably too big, you're right, although OO.o's footer could do with an improved layout: 3-4 vertically arranged columns with a few more useful links, for example. >> 4) A new tableless layout > > This is something we can try now already, however beware of breaking > pages (more precise the css) that makes use of the tables as > selectors. > As we don't have a staging site, it is not easy to do without breaking > the site for at least a couple of minutes/hours. So either now, with > still a week or two before the release of 3.2.1, or if you think it > isn't doable in that timeframe after the release. I'd rather we do this when the new design is ready (that will be some months away) in a 1-2 month period between releases when any negative impact can be minimised. It's likely that the new design will have a different underlying structure (e.g. Connor mentioned some CSS frameworks we could use), so making the existing design tableless now would not really help since it would be redone again. >> [...] >> We could also evaluate the >> action statements and how they fit into the rest of the site (eg >> ensure consistency), > > I won't touch that topic - action statements or not has been > exhausting. I personally still don't like it, but that's what has been > decided upon, I'd rather not change that now. This time, I hope that we will have the UX project working with us from the beginning, and they will be able to offer input with regard to this. My main concern with regard to the action statements is with the consistency of their current implementation - we have the action statements on the home page, and then every other page uses different hyperlink coventions. So we need to decide - either we use the action statements on more pages and make the website more consistent, or we use something else. There was an attempt to do this during the previous redesign, but not much came of it: see, for example, http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Website/Content >> [...] > > So bottom line: The problem is that we don't have a staging area, that > you see the final rendering only on the live system. This causes a > high risk of breaking the whole site. Given that a new release of OOo > is soon to be released, you need be aware that any change now is time > critical. I think we should hold off until we have decided on a new design - we could try the staging approach used during the last redesign (test.OOo - using custom header and footer templates)... and definitely not close to a new release. Regards, Ivan. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
