Way to success?

[Sebastian Faubel]

> I did in Konq + Moz, the two columns of links design squishes the content into 
> a miniscule column, where the one column design degrades quite nicely.

I send you a screenshot, taken at about 800x600. Is this really so bad?
the other design at the same res shows horizontal scrollbars, also the
navigation menu is really small - you have to scroll  exactky 4,5 times
your monitor to get to the links which are definitly not seperated
visually to the main navigation.....better usability?

> *I* personally understand the concept and I'm sure most people already 
> familiar with KDE would do also, but at the end of the day a lot of people 
> aren't going to know the distinction. // are we microsoft? ;-)

??? don't get it.

> I think if we adopt the portal idea 
> though then we cna lose most of the family links from the content sites 
> anyway, just add a few major ones with a link back to the portal.

why? isn't it possible to partially merge portal style and content site?
I think we should take the best of both worlds.

> Codebase <> CSS, the CSS is easy enough to fix up but the PHP and it's 
> underlying includes is what was focused on. Please feel free to bring the CSS 
> up to scratch, as you said it really needs it. :-)

i did in my "one panel" version.

> and about MSIE, are enough of our target audience going to be using the non 
> standards compliant browser in the first place? I guess though if it can be 
> supported better solely by changing the CSS I wouldn't mind but I don't want 
> endless checks on the User Agent to render different html for MSIE alone.

MSIE 6.x for Windows and 5.x for Mac belong definitly the best browsers
in CSS support. Konqueror is in fact less standards compliant.
There's not needed to change only one line of code or css in my versions
to get it diplayed graphically correct in all major browsers including
IE, Moz, Netscape < 6, there's no additional user agent checking needed.
In times of browsers adopting w3c standards this is not needed
anymore...

> What logic? If http://kde.org is to become a portal then it *needs* to have 
> it's content moved elsewhere, a portal should not have any content of it's 
> own.

But is the content on the kde.org homepage not almost portal like? 

> > > The portal could contain things like the latest dot
> > > news, the latest app's, links to the family of sites, a voting poll
> > > and a KDE site of the month area so it would be purely a navigation
> > > aid to getting to the content based pages.

site of the month, app of the month poll and so on are really good
ideas, i like them :-) Aren't the other things already there? 
(dot.news, apps, links & stuff)?

> So where is the problem in my suggestions in that regard?

none ;-)

sebastian
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: konq-800.png
Type: image/png
Size: 74877 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mail.kde.org/mailman/private/kde-www/attachments/20021019/52b1d154/attachment.png>