[Vit-discuss] I'm getting the manager!
curt at hibbs.com
Thu Feb 24 12:05:08 EST 2005
James Britt wrote:
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 10:58 AM
> To: vit-discuss at rubyforge.org
> Subject: Re: [Vit-discuss] I'm getting the manager!
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:20:01 -0600, Curt Hibbs <curt at hibbs.com> wrote:
> > If you all recall, I laid out the ground rules in my original
> posts at the
> > beginning of this week:
> > - The core visual design team will consist of no more
> > than 3 people (must be actual producing contributors,
> > not mere commentators).
> > - This group will do the hard work of the redesign in tight
> > collaboration and periodically present their results to the
> > rest of us for feedback.
> > - This feedback will be considered advisements which
> > the core team will be free to accept or reject at their
> > discretion.
> > This should give each of us influence over the final result
> while avoiding
> > the gridlock and committee-style blandness that often accompanies larger
> > groups.
> > This was the week to find out who is willing to be on the team,
> as well as
> > brainstorm for the initial input to the core team. I will be
> appointing the
> > core team by the end of this week. So that work can begin in
> earnest next
> > week (I will set up a separate mailing list for them to
> converse in their
> > working deliberations).
> Thanks for the clarification. Does "visual team" also include
> information architecture, i.e. what the site is supposed to *do*
> independent (sort of) of specific layout and theme? Some of the mock
> ups I've seen from earlier discussions on ruby-talk seem to take the
> current content and behavior of ruby-lang as a given.
Yes, it should. And we are all here to provide our opinions and perspectives
(which you are doing below :-).
> Much of the discussion of late here seems to be focused on who are the
> target audiences, what are their needs, and how might these needs be
> addressed. If these things are not clear, then a visual team may
> not have enough information to produce an appropriate draft, and
> people will have no clear means to judge whether the draft satisfies
> the requirements beyond personal aesthetic taste.
> There is an argument to be made for simply taking ruby-lang as-is, not
> altering any content or behavior, and just addressing matters of
> usability and aesthetics. Get that done, then reconvene to see about
> the deeper issues. Maybe that is the correct scope of of a visual
> identify team, and perhaps what was intended all along, but the vit
> wiki suggests a broader set of goals.
More information about the vit-discuss