On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 10:27:49 +0200
Brian E Carpenter <brc(_at_)zurich(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com> wrote:
Marshall,
Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:37:50 +0200
Brian E Carpenter <brc(_at_)zurich(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com> wrote:
Edward Lewis wrote:
At 9:20 -0500 6/15/05, wayne wrote:
It is hard to get people to use tools when they don't know they exist
and are very hard to find.
I'd like to add a me too to that and a few suggestions...
I'd like to add that the datatracker be easier to find that having it
"buried" under the IESG roster on the IESG page. I've referenced the
datatracker a lot recently, more so that I thought I ever would. I
think it ought to be up front on the IETF site (i.e., www.ietf.org), as
this is the best indication of the current state of $topic-or-group.
Another tool that I was alerted to that I find helpful is the draft
"differ" at
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/<wg name>/<draft name>/
If it weren't for my WG chair telling me this was being done, I would
have never seen it for documents I am editing.
It's well understood that the ietf.org site is hard to navigate and needs
substantial reorganisation. But this is a major project and will take
time to plan and implement.
Dear Brian;
Since in a real way this is the public interface of the IETF (and since I
have heard
lots of complaints about it over the years), wouldn't it make sense to
- specifically ask for public suggestions for improvements
- have a BOF or an open house in Paris or Vancouver devoted to discussing
this
I agree that we need public comment before action. The challenge with
web design is that explaining what's wrong and what would be better is
very hard to do except in front of the screen. I'm not sure a BOF style
meeting would succeed. Also, I'm pretty sure we can't prepare for this
by Paris - it's resource constrained.
I agree, and have no doubt that Paris is too soon. However, I also know that
feature creep
(add X to the front page, as in the
title of this thread) is not really a good way to do web design -
and that the IETF site is ripe for a re-design.
I (like, I suspect, many others) basically use Google as my initial IETF
resource for
everything except meetings. (For example, when I first heard about IETF tools, I
went to Google and rapidly found the tools site and a bunch more.) Google
basically solves
the forward problem (find out more about X), but it does little for the
inverse problem (which set of X's should I know about), and this, IMHO, is what
the
IETF web site should assist with, and does not (much). This, of course, cannot
be solved
by hiring a fancy web design shop in Venice Beach or Soho and telling them to
go to it,
but will require thought and community input.
Regards
Marshall
Brian
This was done in DC at IETF 61 for the IETF multicast video and it seemed
to work well
(multicast video of 2 rooms is now unicast audio of all rooms).
Regards
Marshall
You can in fact find the tools page off the IESG Activities/Actions
page, so it's only one level down. And I agree, that page is in need
of a clean-up.
While we're talking, let me point to a recently created "operational
notes" page at http://www.ietf.org/u/ietfchair/opNotes.html
Comments welcome. That too is currently linked in an obscure place.
Nevertheless, Google found it in 0.38 seconds.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf