Two sides.

["Steve Hall" <steve_hall mindspring com>]

After looking at Ryan Muldoon's <rpmuldoon students wisc edu> "initial
structure ideas" (Thursday, November 16, 2000 9:17 PM) and Owen Taylor's
<otaylor redhat com> "Intro and thoughts" (Friday, November 17, 2000 12:17
AM) I had some fundamental questions about the intention of the Gnome web
page.

Is the whole thing for the developer? Does Gnome want the responsibility of
reaching the common user? Do/will we abdicate that function to HelixCode or
Easel?

If Gnome really DOES want to reach the non-technical user, I make a motion
that we split the site into two sides, the front for a new user and the back
for everything else.

It seems to me that we have a *ton* of stuff that belongs under developer
and much less for the common user. Frankly, I believe that we need to make
the front of the Gnome site understandable enough so that even my mother can
find recipe software, download it and leave. If she needs some help, that
should be accessible, too. Perhaps a separate user posting space, news, and
mail archive would be desirable for them someday, too, but split off
everything into Developer that would confuse her. Call it the Steve's Mom
rule if you like. I feel like 75% of what www.gnome.org presents right now
is developer related and only confuses the other 25% for my mom.  ;)

With two halves, folks like me can contribute to the content of the front
end without being developers. I'm excited about enabling others to learn
about our environment. We can advocate, help, draw, document, and explain,
while developers can contribute tons of raw docs to the backend without
having to worry about re-formatting documentation or confusing my mom. This
also creates a processing system for content. Raw and complex deliveries are
stored in the warehouse with selective refinement and marketing of portions
for the marketing types.

Ok, so there may be concerns about duplication on both sides. I like to
think that user stuff, once well written, doesn't need to be updated as
frequently and is more macro than the other. It doesn't have to reflect the
latest features, or upcoming architectural changes. Just a general picture
of each project. If a project isn't mature enough to be explained here, it
probably isn't appropriate for a user type anyway.

On the other hand, developer information probably should value immediacy
over format. But there's no reason that the two can't be connected. After
all, isn't that what Al Gore had in mind when he invented they hyperlink?
Whatever Developer ends up looking like is fine with me; I just want the
front and user pages to simply present our desktop to a Windows user in all
the glory that it is! (Is that too much to ask of our site with volunteer
labor?)

I'm thinking most of the content we have is pretty good, we're really just
talking about a presentation and coordination project. Step one is
organization, and I guess I'm proposing that we divide and conquer so us
less-technical types can help out and reach the other audience.

I had some more comments about text graphics and CSS but if you've made it
this far I'll cut you a break.

Steve Hall (digitect mindspring com)