Re: Requirements for updated site

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexey Borzov [mailto:borz_off(at)cs(dot)msu(dot)su]
> Sent: 15 January 2004 11:22
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Requirements for updated site
>
> Hi!
>
> I will not bother being polite either...

I wasn't aware I had stopped being polite. If so I apologise.

> Dave Page wrote:
> >>I presume that 99.9% of these is documentation. And it won't be
> >>translated, at least not in *this* way.
> >
> > Why not? The whole point is to have *one* system for the whole site
> > and not a mish-mash of different ways of building bits of the site.
>
> Because it is STUPID. Because the docs are written in DocBook
> and HTML is built from this. Because when you translate
> "just" HTML, you won't be able to convert "translated" docs
> to other formats like PS or PDF. Because doc translation is
> far beyond the scope of website project.
>
> Enough reasons?

Not really because what you have written makes little sense to me. Why
can't you convert translated HTML to other formats? What does it matter
to the web project anyway?

> Separation of PHP and HTML (or rather of domain and
> presentation logic: you are keeping SQL *and* HTML in one
> file, tangled in rather interesting ways!) is not an answer
> in one case: when you are the only one developing something
> and when you don't want anynone's dirty hands touch your
> precious-s-s code.

Again, you are not reading what I have said.

1) I advocated some seperation and cleanup of code. I *do not* want a
system where it is split into *too many* separate places, thus making it
a nightmare to see the whole picture easily.

2) It is not my precious-s-s code. I did not write it.

>
> Wow. That's why main menu is in 'x-small'? For *readability*
> and *accessibility* reasons? Wow.

Which on my standard configuration Windows XP machine is the same size
font as the font I'm typing this email in - also standard for Outlook
2003. When coded it was tested in many browsers on many platforms with
no reported anomolies that I am aware of.

You will note that if a user increases the font size in their browser,
then the text increases appropriately rather than being fixed at a
smaller size in the stylesheet.

> > As I said before, we have a specific todo list here. First
> build the
> > framework, second update the design and third, restructure all
> > appropriate sites and content.
>
> Well, right above you objected to building the framework and
> making is easier to
> update design. Where's truth?

We want a framework. We do not want an overcomplicated framework. Why
split everything into a dozen different files and a template engine if 3
or 4 files with a little PHP code will work just fine, and be just as
maintainable, if not more so?

> > Much as you may not like the existing design, it is tidy,
> structured
> > and frames and focuses the user on the main content.
>
> Well, as you are probably the designer of the thing, I only
> have to agree. This is *absolutely* fabulous design, the best
> I've ever seen. I sincerely hope that MySQL AB will hire you
> to redesign their site as well, so that the projects will be
> able to compete on even grounds!

Again, you're not listening. Yes, I coded the original portal, however
the design was the collaborative work of a group of people, including
members of -core. What can possibly make you imagine that you can come
in here, tell us that the work and designs agreed by a number of people
is crap and expect us to rewrite everything your way without discussion?

Now don't get me wrong, the current design is not perfect, but it was
agreed by concensus. We are open to suggestions in the correct forum
(here or webmaster(at)postgresql(dot)org) and have implemented numerous in the
past, however as stated though, we already have a basic plan in place,
and whatever suggestions we take on will have to fit in with that.

> I won't mention the fact that most of the questions about
> postgresql I see go like this: "where do I get the windows
> port?", "where do I get a specific interface?", "does
> postgresql have replication?".

All of which can be seen within 2 clicks of the homepage, but none of
your suggestions would address that in any way as far as I could see.
Some wording might change, but the usefulness of that is subjective.

> But that's me, I read wrong
> lists and forums, such questions are not asked on pgsql-www,
> because it is conveniently closed.

It was closed, it is not now. Following a change of ppl we opened the
list and made the archives public. Anyone is free to subscribe - the
only restriction is that we wish to stay tighly on topic so
subscriptions must be approved to ensure all list members truly have an
interest in helping out.

For those that simply wish to mail off a suggestion, the
webmaster(at)postgresql(dot)org address may be used. That address is monitored
by various ppl including some that are not part of the web team to
ensure that people get an appropriate response.

Regards, Dave.