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

Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Design Proposal

From: Emily Boyd <emily(at)tinysofa(dot)org>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Design Proposal
Date: 2004-10-27 21:36:44
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-www
Hi Simon,

> On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 16:43, Gavin M. Roy wrote:
>>I love it, it's very well done, professional, and fresh.
> Yes, well done. Definitely professional and fresh. 
> Omar and Emily, thank you.
> A few questions:
> - what is the page weight with all those graphics?

Graphics would be 22Kb.

HTML would be as concise as possible (certainly nowhere near the 22Kb of 
the current site).

> - what does it look like for people with graphics turned off? Do we need
> all three elephants?

The icon for the About section can change (making one less elephant :)

However, we believe that having a photo of an elephant adds to the 
professional image of the site.

Of course, all images would have ALT tags, and all text would be CSS-styled.

> - with regard to design, we should aim for the largest selection of
> people - which means unfortunately lowest common denominator:
> =800x600
> =assume slow modem
> Many new users will not have broadband or even local mirrors.

Yes, we are mindful in designing the site that not everyone has 
broadband and screens with high resolutions.

> Also, could we solicit some international opinion on whether the icons
> are understood?

This isn't a concrete design - we are happy to look at changing the 
icons or other aspects of the design if there is a consensus to change it.

The aim of this design proposal was to give an idea of the potential for 
the site. This would be the design framework for the site, but 
individual elements are subject to change if there are conceptual issues 
with them.

> ...and last, when did we start having a "Support" link off the homepage?
> Where does it go?

Details the support options available for users - both community 
(mailing lists and IRC) and commercial support.

>>>We are willing to move forward with the design of the rest of the site 
>>>if there is some interest in our proposal. We estimate that full 
>>>migration and consolidation of current content and sites would take 
>>>approximately one month, if not less, using a content management 
>>>system to ease administration and maintenance. The main site can be 
>>>finished in line with the release of PostgreSQL 8, which I understand 
>>>is a couple of weeks away.
> (I take it that is a PostgreSQL-based CMS???)

Of course, all our sites run under PostgreSQL... what else is there? :)

That was written with no foreknowledge of the current pgweb system, and 
since there's very little point in duplicating the effort...

> Doing this for PostgreSQL 8.0 full release is worthwhile, sufficient to
> slip the release by a week if need be. No point in generating publicity
> if it doesn't tie in with the materials being ready.

If the design is acceptable with whatever conceptual tweaks deemed 
necessary then we'll submit the patches needed against pgweb's templates 
in time for PostgreSQL 8.

Emily Boyd

In response to

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2004-10-27 21:40:46
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Design Proposal
Previous:From: World Wide Web OwnerDate: 2004-10-27 21:35:55
Subject: New Event

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2004-10-27 21:40:46
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Design Proposal
Previous:From: Roderick A. AndersonDate: 2004-10-27 21:24:45
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Design Proposal

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group