I'm glad to see this being discussed, as I agree that the home page and the overall menu structure can certainly be improved. I think the proposed RFC design has a bunch of good points, but, when you design (or redesign) something, you need to put the cart before the horse. Are there basic guidelines you can follow? What are the design goals? How are things working now?
Specifically: If you take a look at the server logs, you can see where people went from the main page. (grep for home page as referring link) You can tell how people are using it now. I suspect you won't find people clicking on the "Debian International" link because it is not clear what it means. Maybe you'll find that 90% go straight to the installation. Do more people read the DWN than the event centered news releases? Are more than 5% of people going to the mirrors? Are they worth having? Let's find out! A basic guideline: Make links based on action. "Install Debian" "Support Debian" Use verbs. Let people take direct action. Instead of a link to the security mailing list, let people input their e-mail address. Can we agree that the MAIN purpose of a homepage is to jump off to further information? I think the news and secruity updates belong on the page, but need to remain secondary priorities. Should there be a scheme for the menu structure? I think so. If there is a reliable method to the hierarchy users will learn it and use it to navigate. For instance, should the submenus listed on the homepage be linked from the main menu? I.E. Should the user find a link to /docs/books if they follow the bigger link to /docs? Right now they don't. I'm not sure which is the better way, but I think we need to be consistent. Should different parts of the website look different? Clearly all parts of Debian need to look like they are part of Debian, but there could be subtle clues. (A CD behind the swirl on cds.debian.org, etc) I guess what I am asking for is DELIBERATE redesign. To me, this means: * A fact based analysis of where we are now. * A set of design guidelines (maybe a small web policy manual?) * Prototype sites put up for review (with a specific comment period as many volunteers have different schedules, and we should make sure people get a fair chance to air their concerns.) * A final decision process (voting, benevolent dictator, etc..) Of course all this hinges on people willing to do the work. I am willing to give opinions, do research, and create prototypes. Thanks! -Jeff ------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Albro [EMAIL PROTECTED] Customer Interaction Consultant Boston, MA
