Thread: Re: [pgsql-www] PostgreSQL.org Design Proposal
I love it, it's very well done, professional, and fresh. Gavin Omar Kilani wrote: > Dear PostgreSQL Users and Developers, > > We would like to propose the following design as the basis for a new > postgresql.org. > > http://treehou.se/~emily/postgresql_design_proposal.png > > We are submitting this proposal as we, and many other users and > developers, feel that the current site portrays PostgreSQL in a less > than flattering light. > > Whilst the beta concept design is a great improvement upon the > existing site, we believe that our design proposal conveys a > professional image and portrays PostgreSQL as distinct amongst open > source projects that use a similar look and feel to the beta site. > > Additionally, this proposal focuses on reducing information overload, > providing a clean interface while simplifying and consolidating the > vast amount of material on the site. > > A survey of users and colleagues suggests that there may be interest > in adopting this design, and so, we would like to know if there is > interest amongst pgsql-www and pgsql-advocacy. > > 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. > > Thanks for your time. > > Best Regards, > Omar Kilani > - and - > Emily Boyd > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
I like it too, very much. Only question is, how does the design scale to 800x600, which should probably still be the minimum? Gavin M. Roy wrote: > I love it, it's very well done, professional, and fresh. > > Gavin > > Omar Kilani wrote: > >> Dear PostgreSQL Users and Developers, >> >> We would like to propose the following design as the basis for a new >> postgresql.org. >> >> http://treehou.se/~emily/postgresql_design_proposal.png >> >> We are submitting this proposal as we, and many other users and >> developers, feel that the current site portrays PostgreSQL in a less >> than flattering light. >> >> Whilst the beta concept design is a great improvement upon the >> existing site, we believe that our design proposal conveys a >> professional image and portrays PostgreSQL as distinct amongst open >> source projects that use a similar look and feel to the beta site. >> >> Additionally, this proposal focuses on reducing information overload, >> providing a clean interface while simplifying and consolidating the >> vast amount of material on the site. >> >> A survey of users and colleagues suggests that there may be interest >> in adopting this design, and so, we would like to know if there is >> interest amongst pgsql-www and pgsql-advocacy. >> >> 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. >> >> Thanks for your time. >> >> Best Regards, >> Omar Kilani >> - and - >> Emily Boyd >> >> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >> TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend > > > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > >
Omar Kilani wrote: > Dear PostgreSQL Users and Developers, > > We would like to propose the following design as the basis for a new postgresql.org. > > http://treehou.se/~emily/postgresql_design_proposal.png > >... > A survey of users and colleagues suggests that there may be interest in adopting this design, and so, we would like > to know if there is interest amongst pgsql-www and pgsql-advocacy. > > Thanks for your time. This is a very well designed page and for sure this will be also very important step in making PostgreSQL more popular and open for new users. Great job. Congratulations. ML
Ned Lilly wrote: > I like it too, very much. Only question is, how does the design scale > to 800x600, which should probably still be the minimum? I seriously doubt anyone trying to use PostgreSQL is stuck at 800x600. 1024x768 is probably good enough. It does fix in 1024x768 btw :) The only part that I don't like is the big old elephant. Although I think it is a nice touch, I think it takes to much away from the info being presented. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > > > Gavin M. Roy wrote: > >> I love it, it's very well done, professional, and fresh. >> >> Gavin >> >> Omar Kilani wrote: >> >>> Dear PostgreSQL Users and Developers, >>> >>> We would like to propose the following design as the basis for a new >>> postgresql.org. >>> >>> http://treehou.se/~emily/postgresql_design_proposal.png >>> >>> We are submitting this proposal as we, and many other users and >>> developers, feel that the current site portrays PostgreSQL in a less >>> than flattering light. >>> >>> Whilst the beta concept design is a great improvement upon the >>> existing site, we believe that our design proposal conveys a >>> professional image and portrays PostgreSQL as distinct amongst open >>> source projects that use a similar look and feel to the beta site. >>> >>> Additionally, this proposal focuses on reducing information overload, >>> providing a clean interface while simplifying and consolidating the >>> vast amount of material on the site. >>> >>> A survey of users and colleagues suggests that there may be interest >>> in adopting this design, and so, we would like to know if there is >>> interest amongst pgsql-www and pgsql-advocacy. >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> Thanks for your time. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Omar Kilani >>> - and - >>> Emily Boyd >>> >>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >>> TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend >> >> >> >> >> >> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate >> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your >> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly >> >> > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) -- Command Prompt, Inc., home of PostgreSQL Replication, and plPHP. Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL
Attachment
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Ned Lilly wrote:
>> I like it too, very much. Only question is, how does the design scale
>> to 800x600, which should probably still be the minimum?
> I seriously doubt anyone trying to use PostgreSQL is stuck at 800x600.
> 1024x768 is probably good enough. It does fix in 1024x768 btw :)
One thing that annoys the heck out of me is webpage designers who think
I should use a full-screen window to look at their pages. Yes, I have
a large monitor; no, you can't have it all.
If the design doesn't adapt to a smaller window reasonably gracefully,
it's broken.
In this case, about all I could see without scrolling right was the
content-free logo and picture ... so I wasn't real impressed.
regards, tom lane
Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Ned Lilly wrote: > >> I like it too, very much. Only question is, how does the design scale >> to 800x600, which should probably still be the minimum? > > > I seriously doubt anyone trying to use PostgreSQL is stuck at 800x600. > 1024x768 is probably good enough. It does fix in 1024x768 btw :) Well, that's a call for the design pros. But take a look at leading mass-market sites - Yahoo, AOL, eBay, NY Times, etc. They're still hardcoded to 800.
> > > Well, that's a call for the design pros. But take a look at leading > mass-market sites - Yahoo, AOL, eBay, NY Times, etc. They're still > hardcoded to 800. Yes, and remarkably hard to read due to the amount of data they try to squeeze into that space :). I am not saying we should not support 800x600, I am just saying that 1024x768 is probably a decent enough constraint. If you are browsing the web in 800x600 you expect to have to scroll a little (emphasis little). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- Command Prompt, Inc., home of PostgreSQL Replication, and plPHP. Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL
Attachment
Tom, that layout is a PNG graphic, of course it doesn't scale ;-) But this design (done right, which I suspect Omar & Emily of doing) could easily collapse 200 pixels to drop to a minimum 800 pixels wide. To me this is a non issue. And if you've got a big monitor, then use it! Why pretend to surf on a Palm Pilot? -- Mitch On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:47:40 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes: > > Ned Lilly wrote: > >> I like it too, very much. Only question is, how does the design scale > >> to 800x600, which should probably still be the minimum? > > > I seriously doubt anyone trying to use PostgreSQL is stuck at 800x600. > > 1024x768 is probably good enough. It does fix in 1024x768 btw :) > > One thing that annoys the heck out of me is webpage designers who think > I should use a full-screen window to look at their pages. Yes, I have > a large monitor; no, you can't have it all. > > If the design doesn't adapt to a smaller window reasonably gracefully, > it's broken. > > In this case, about all I could see without scrolling right was the > content-free logo and picture ... so I wasn't real impressed. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your > joining column's datatypes do not match >
Mitch Pirtle wrote: > Tom, that layout is a PNG graphic, of course it doesn't scale ;-) > > But this design (done right, which I suspect Omar & Emily of doing) > could easily collapse 200 pixels to drop to a minimum 800 pixels wide. > To me this is a non issue. Before this turns into a debate on a technicality such as how much space Tom lets me have on his screen... :) Just wanted to note that this is a fixed size design proposal, and it will scale gracefully to 800 x 600 upon HTMLification. > And if you've got a big monitor, then use it! Why pretend to surf on > a Palm Pilot? > > -- Mitch (I was going to mention that it was a PNG... but Mitch beat me to it... :) Regards, Emily Boyd
> > And if you've got a big monitor, then use it! Why pretend to surf on > a Palm Pilot? Well although that is an extreme example, typically I don't "surf" the web. I am looking for a specific piece of information and I don't want to have to bounce between windows to make use of the information I find. I solve this by having two monitors but not all people have this option. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > > -- Mitch > > On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:47:40 -0400, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > >>"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes: >> >>>Ned Lilly wrote: >>> >>>>I like it too, very much. Only question is, how does the design scale >>>>to 800x600, which should probably still be the minimum? >> >>>I seriously doubt anyone trying to use PostgreSQL is stuck at 800x600. >>>1024x768 is probably good enough. It does fix in 1024x768 btw :) >> >>One thing that annoys the heck out of me is webpage designers who think >>I should use a full-screen window to look at their pages. Yes, I have >>a large monitor; no, you can't have it all. >> >>If the design doesn't adapt to a smaller window reasonably gracefully, >>it's broken. >> >>In this case, about all I could see without scrolling right was the >>content-free logo and picture ... so I wasn't real impressed. >> >> regards, tom lane >> >>---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- >>TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your >> joining column's datatypes do not match >> -- Command Prompt, Inc., home of PostgreSQL Replication, and plPHP. Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting. +1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL
Attachment
Emily, Omar, Everyone: The offered design is good looking and I think worth discussing further on the WWW list and here. However, as Dave said, our current roadblock is getting implemented the design the WWW (Alexey, Dave, etc.) team have already completed; it's waiting on a test site for migration. Considering how close 8.0 is, I can't really see jumping back to the drawing board no matter how much people like Omar & Emily's design. -- --Josh Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
Hi, Josh Berkus wrote: > The offered design is good looking and I think worth discussing further on the > WWW list and here. I think it is worth noting that everyone cheerleading for the latest design trend is free to try to skin the "new" website. It is not too hard to do: checkout portal/ part of pgweb module from gborg, stare intensely at the current templates, prepare the new templates with the similar structure (update the PHP code that handles them if needed), commit, celebrate. > However, as Dave said, our current roadblock is getting implemented the design > the WWW (Alexey, Dave, etc.) team have already completed; I am glad to know that so many people helped me. Funnily I didn't quite notice them (except for Robert Treat) when working on the new website's code and content. Our current roadblock is *not* the new design (which is applied, see [1]), but the content. The website todo list [2] outlines the stuff. Volunteers?.. > it's waiting on a > test site for migration. Considering how close 8.0 is, I can't really see > jumping back to the drawing board no matter how much people like Omar & > Emily's design. [1] http://wwwdevel.postgresql.org/ [2] http://wwwdevel.postgresql.org/todo
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? - what does it look like for people with graphics turned off? Do we need all three elephants? - 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. Also, could we solicit some international opinion on whether the icons are understood? ...and last, when did we start having a "Support" link off the homepage? Where does it go? > Omar Kilani wrote: > > > We would like to propose the following design as the basis for a new > > postgresql.org. > > > > http://treehou.se/~emily/postgresql_design_proposal.png > > > > We are submitting this proposal as we, and many other users and > > developers, feel that the current site portrays PostgreSQL in a less > > than flattering light. > > > > Whilst the beta concept design is a great improvement upon the > > existing site, we believe that our design proposal conveys a > > professional image and portrays PostgreSQL as distinct amongst open > > source projects that use a similar look and feel to the beta site. > > Agreed, well done. > > > > 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???) 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. -- Best Regards, Simon Riggs
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Alexey Borzov wrote: > [1] http://wwwdevel.postgresql.org/ ??? Nothing displays (ie. blank page) > [2] http://wwwdevel.postgresql.org/todo This works but makes reference to the main page (above). -- "Open Source Software - You usually get more than you pay for..." "Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL"
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. Regards, Emily Boyd
On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 14:22 -0400, Emily Boyd wrote: > > (I was going to mention that it was a PNG... but Mitch beat me to it... :) > > Regards, > Emily Boyd Looks great! -- /*************************************** * Robby Russell | Owner.Developer.Geek * PLANET ARGON | www.planetargon.com * Portland, OR | robby@planetargon.com * 503.351.4730 | blog.planetargon.com * PHP/PostgreSQL Hosting & Development * --- Now supporting PHP5 and PHP4 --- ****************************************/
Attachment
Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> >> >> Well, that's a call for the design pros. But take a look at leading >> mass-market sites - Yahoo, AOL, eBay, NY Times, etc. They're still >> hardcoded to 800. > > > Yes, and remarkably hard to read due to the amount of data they try to > squeeze into that space :). I am not saying we should not support > 800x600, I am just saying that 1024x768 is probably a decent enough > constraint. If you are browsing the web in 800x600 you expect to have to > scroll a little (emphasis little). I don't mind scrolling down, but I dislike having to scroll side to side. I have a large monitor, but typically don't maximize my brower. Just FWIW! Mark