[Pydotorg-redesign] What are the goals?

[Todd Grimason]

* Tim Parkin <tim.parkin at pollenationinternet.com> [2003-09-26 08:20]:
> practice. It is at these pointes we *NEED* feedback. Case in point: full
> support for Netscape vs. best practices in w3c wai accessibility and
> standards/semantic compliance. In this I raised it as a conflict and
> looked for feedback but received very little and had to assume that
> support for Netscape was less important than good accessibility and

As a +1 for valid CSS/XHTML, Redhat's (admittedly lowkey/simple) new
site for "Fedora" uses CSS and no tables. Other points in favor of
this approach are meeting reqs such as:

- low bandwidth: this type of markup *greatly* reduces byte counts

- accessible: to nearly every "browser"-type device in existence -
 even Netscape 4 - it's just not purty in NS4 or earlier. Works great
in mobile phones even! (for looking up functions on the site from a
pub?)

- IE gets most of it right, so the all-important "manager-types" can
use the site with no problems. Geekier users will likely be using
something besides NS4, so we're covered there (Konqueror, Mozilla,
Opera, Lynx(!), Safari, etc.)

- minimizes work: clean use of CSS (separation of content/style) helps
reduce maintenance work

- visibility: well-known sites are starting to convert, such as
previously mentioned Redhat site, ESPN, Wired News, etc. Each time
they do, they get a fair bit of press in the "design/standards world";
 this is a good group to attract new users from as well. 

- future maintainability: won't have to do this in a year when full
CSS/XHTML is even more widespread and beneficial

- 100s more reasons all documented over the web and the excellent
booklist Tim posted...


-- 

___________________________
toddgrimason*todd at slack.net