Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Alternate PostgreSQL.org Design

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Omar Kilani" <omar(at)tinysofa(dot)org>, <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>,<pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Alternate PostgreSQL.org Design
Date: 2004-11-12 09:22:54
Message-ID: E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E43070DA@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-www
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-www-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org 
> [mailto:pgsql-www-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Omar Kilani
> Sent: 12 November 2004 02:38
> To: pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org; pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: [pgsql-www] Alternate PostgreSQL.org Design
> 
> Hi Again,
> 
> We would like to put forward an alternate design to the 
> current wwwdevel design.
> 
> It is available at: http://postgresql.tinysofa.com/
> 
> We believe that it is clean, professional and simple. And it 
> makes the release of 8.0 actually... exciting. :)

Yes, it is a very nice design, far nicer than your last one :-)

I am concerned though - after a long time looking around and discussing
things on and off, we already all agreed on a design. I'm concerned for
2 main reasons:

1) We accepted a concept from Lukasz - I don't like the idea of throwing
away his hard work in this way.

2) What happens if xyz web design comes and offers us another great
design next week. Do we start again? Where/when do we draw the line? If
I'm honest, based on our agreement to use Lukasz' design I think that
line should be drawn already.


> It is a *drop-in* replacement for the current pgweb design. 
> No additional work is required to retrofit the current 
> wwwdevel design. 
> It's already done!
> 
> It validates. It is designed for 800x600 and up. And it looks 
> pretty. :)

It does not expand with the browser though. That is a requirement of the
new site.

> By clicking "About", you can see the design for the section 
> navigation and the sponsor box.

Should be Overview, but I'll put that down to your using an old cvs
snapshot!

> We've gone through a bit of the current content and fixed it 
> up with proper headings and so forth. But we believe that the 
> content needs to be restructured to fit within navigational 
> guide lines.
> 
> Some issues with the current content of the site:

Yes, content and the current split of the sites is a known issue, and is
the next phase of the project.

Regards, Dave.

Responses

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Robert TreatDate: 2004-11-12 15:07:49
Subject: Re: Alternate PostgreSQL.org Design
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2004-11-12 09:10:37
Subject: Re: Alternate PostgreSQL.org Design

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Jean-Christophe ArnuDate: 2004-11-12 14:45:18
Subject: Re: [translators] Regional Press Contacts, Press
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2004-11-12 09:10:37
Subject: Re: Alternate PostgreSQL.org Design

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group