tarquin wrote:
I'm open to suggestions. But we really need to
rethink our design. I
know that all of us here on this list are used to the current page
layout, so we see right through its problems.
But think like a luser for a moment: there is nothing that guides the
eye. The are straggly blocks of links that come at you from all sides.
I showed the site to the library staff and their eyes just glazed over
with that "too much scary text" look people get. We are talking about
people who panic at the sight of a Microsoft Word dialog box here.
This is (sadly) the average net user.
Remember who we've said before that we need to attract editors from
other backgrounds, such as literature, history, art -- people who are
probably not tech-wise? This is a hurdle we need to lower.
This just seen on the village pump:
I get the impression that the input to the
encyclopedia is rather
unbalanced: lots on computer stuff (surprise!), science, pop
music,
sci-fi/fantasy, bits of geog/hist. The impression is that the typical
user is a young male with computer qualifications and stereotypically
geeky interests (jimfbleak <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jimfbleak>)
I figure I'm getting little response because the developers are swamped
with database and optimization problems. I have the capabilities to work
on our stylesheets and layout myself.
But I can't get access to our CVS because I can't set up SSH on Windows.
Is there someone who can help me? Has anyone here successfully set up
Wikipedia CVS & SSH access on windows?
This is an important issue, and I am prepared to work on it.
-- tarquin