[Theforum] Prioritising future WEO elements

David McCreath mccreath at ak.net
Wed Feb 20 20:41:30 CST 2002

Isaac Forman wrote:

> I've received little response to previous efforts to encourage some
> discussion regarding future WEO elements, skeletal layout concepts, etc.

Stupid job keeps gettin' in my way. Like I don't have anything better to
do than respond to my boss's every whim! ;)

> You can see two of my messages here:
> Future WEO elements:
> http://lists.evolt.org/theforumarchive/Week-of-Mon-20020204/003123.html
> Current WEO elements:
> http://lists.evolt.org/theforumarchive/Week-of-Mon-20020204/003118.html

I don't really have anything to add to that whole thread except to give
a big +1 to the idea of moving the site-specific catnav into a list of
links instead of a select.

> Here's what I think is likely to appear on the future WEO frontdoor, and
> what I will base my first design concept on (please remember, there is
> nothing stopping others from trying also!).

Hopefully I'll have some time to try something soon.

>  - latest articles (content)

Have we discussed the idea of date-based display versus
most-recent-*n-articles display? (IOW, an article is on the homepage for
7 days, then falls off, rather than simply showing the 10 most recent

>  - latest comments (content)

Is "latest comments" admin only? I can't remember.

>  - blog-style news (content)

Is this to replace the "News" category? (Sorry if this has been
discussed before ... )

>  - featured article (content)
>  - 2 org-wide promos: submit article, ask a question on thelist (org-wide)

Add a "dontation" link to the brainstorming part. I'd like to think we
can get the accounting/accountability hammered out before the new design
is finalized.

> You may remember this rough.gif
> (http://members.evolt.org/isaac/evolt/rough.gif) showing vague positioning
> Does anyone have any thoughts regarding prioritising these elements?

I think you're on the right path. Taking into account the words "rough"
and "vague", I'd like to see less physical space given to the org-wide
header. Let's make that stand out with its design, not its size. (I know
you're probably not planning on the proportions in rough.gif, I just had
to say it.)

What about a collapsible org-wide header? (just an idea ... no thought
given to difficulty of execution)

> I'm hoping to put some of my thoughts into a GIF sometime this week.

Looking forward to seeing them/it.


More information about the theforum mailing list