Comments on: Drupal.org – Initial thoughts on the Information Architecture http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/ pretty design pending Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:30:46 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: disambiguity - » Drupal.org - more thoughts on the Information Architecture (Part 1 - Projects, Downloads etc.) http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/comment-page-1/#comment-154495 disambiguity - » Drupal.org - more thoughts on the Information Architecture (Part 1 - Projects, Downloads etc.) Tue, 30 Sep 2008 13:54:08 +0000 http://www.disambiguity.com/?p=577#comment-154495 [...] to everyone who gave feedback on my initial thoughts on the information architecture - it was certainly food for thought and, as a result of that and some more work on our part, [...] [...] to everyone who gave feedback on my initial thoughts on the information architecture – it was certainly food for thought and, as a result of that and some more work on our part, [...]

]]> By: leisa.reichelt http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/comment-page-1/#comment-154105 leisa.reichelt Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:57:51 +0000 http://www.disambiguity.com/?p=577#comment-154105 thanks so much to everyone for your feedback here and elsewhere (on your blogs, on groups.drupal.org, on the Flickr group etc.) I've been working to pull all of this feedback together and am putting together a new post with an updated / evolved version of the IA and some more thoughts/explanations etc. very soon! Stay tuned! thanks so much to everyone for your feedback here and elsewhere (on your blogs, on groups.drupal.org, on the Flickr group etc.)

I’ve been working to pull all of this feedback together and am putting together a new post with an updated / evolved version of the IA and some more thoughts/explanations etc. very soon! Stay tuned!

]]> By: Derek Wright (dww) http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/comment-page-1/#comment-153939 Derek Wright (dww) Mon, 29 Sep 2008 06:17:07 +0000 http://www.disambiguity.com/?p=577#comment-153939 This mostly looks great. My first concern is that I believe the documentation should "live" close to what it documents. In particular, the documentation for each contributed project (module, theme, whatever) should be an integral part of that project's home page, not buried off on a separate documentation.d.o site. A significant portion of your IA work will be making it easier to find projects (sounds like you're going to have 1 or maybe 2 subsites devoted just to this). I'd *really* hate to see a 3rd way to navigate the projects on the docs.d.o site, too. This will just be a pain in everyone's ass -- people trying to find the docs for a particular project, people trying to update docs, project maintainers, etc. In case you haven't seen it, I've posted some thoughts about merging more of the "community" functionality from groups.d.o and the per-project documentation into the project pages themselves: <a href="http://groups.drupal.org/node/15295" rel="nofollow">drupal.org projects as Organic Groups</a>. This has generated some good discussion which is worth a read. One of the topics that came up is having a per-project forum directly connected to each project, instead of having this stuff going into a separate catch-all forum on a different site. The people using, contributing to, and maintaining each project are their own (overlapping) communities, and those people need all the help they can get to be in touch with each other. The more we make the project pages into the hub of each mini community, the better. This mostly looks great.

My first concern is that I believe the documentation should “live” close to what it documents. In particular, the documentation for each contributed project (module, theme, whatever) should be an integral part of that project’s home page, not buried off on a separate documentation.d.o site. A significant portion of your IA work will be making it easier to find projects (sounds like you’re going to have 1 or maybe 2 subsites devoted just to this). I’d *really* hate to see a 3rd way to navigate the projects on the docs.d.o site, too. This will just be a pain in everyone’s ass — people trying to find the docs for a particular project, people trying to update docs, project maintainers, etc.

In case you haven’t seen it, I’ve posted some thoughts about merging more of the “community” functionality from groups.d.o and the per-project documentation into the project pages themselves: drupal.org projects as Organic Groups. This has generated some good discussion which is worth a read.

One of the topics that came up is having a per-project forum directly connected to each project, instead of having this stuff going into a separate catch-all forum on a different site.

The people using, contributing to, and maintaining each project are their own (overlapping) communities, and those people need all the help they can get to be in touch with each other. The more we make the project pages into the hub of each mini community, the better.

]]> By: prodosh http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/comment-page-1/#comment-152562 prodosh Fri, 26 Sep 2008 14:51:49 +0000 http://www.disambiguity.com/?p=577#comment-152562 We should look at the main categories of visitors the Drupal site serves (very high level) and try to see if the proposed IA / site design meets each of their unique needs: A. Those who use Drupal for their solutions (companies, newspapers, content editors etc.) - basically end users or "clients" of Drupal B. Those who develop or design using Drupal as a tool (service providers) C. Those interested in or who want to use Drupal (potential clients, decision makers, journalists, reviewers, technology or design companies etc) D. Those who contribute to Drupal (the developers and community) and make it what it is The exercise would involve making sure that each of these groups is easily able to find the information relevant to them, that they are looking for or that d.o thinks they should have. I think this exercise would make sure that whatever IA or design you pick it will work for most of the visitors to d.o We should look at the main categories of visitors the Drupal site serves (very high level) and try to see if the proposed IA / site design meets each of their unique needs:
A. Those who use Drupal for their solutions (companies, newspapers, content editors etc.) – basically end users or “clients” of Drupal
B. Those who develop or design using Drupal as a tool (service providers)
C. Those interested in or who want to use Drupal (potential clients, decision makers, journalists, reviewers, technology or design companies etc)
D. Those who contribute to Drupal (the developers and community) and make it what it is

The exercise would involve making sure that each of these groups is easily able to find the information relevant to them, that they are looking for or that d.o thinks they should have. I think this exercise would make sure that whatever IA or design you pick it will work for most of the visitors to d.o

]]> By: Claudio Luis Vera http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/comment-page-1/#comment-151767 Claudio Luis Vera Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:51:21 +0000 http://www.disambiguity.com/?p=577#comment-151767 Thanks for having the courage to share your work-in-progress with all of us. Your team is *spot on* with its approach. Our firm has been wrestling with many of your same issues over and over, to the point that some of these patterns are part of the theory we use in designing sites. If not to validate your thinking, here's what we've learned: network/portal header - Great idea! We call it a "universal nav" which we use as a valuable strip of real estate at the top to move you around a large site's different properties. It's also a good location to let a user log in and log out, and you can use color to reflect this state. logged in vs. not logged in: you've got great approach, because these really are different pages for different audiences. One version should tout the benefits of joining and have very general information for those not familiar with Drupal. The logged-in version should have personalized content and be customizable to a power user. home page vs. portal: Different people will want to see different information, and you may even want to have separate pages for drupal.com (what a newbie would try first) and a link-packed portal page for a power user. Simplicity is great for a first-time brand experience, but lists of links are great time-savers once you know your way around. Personally, I'd keep a portal page in the spec that's close in structure to the current d.o home page, and maybe give it the URL of my.drupal.org. Design site on drupal.org? Design and UI are such loaded issues that you should consider having a home for them on the d.o. site -- but also keep a separate site where they can take center stage. "Design" and "usability" can mean _such_ different things to different people, especially when you're trying to mix developers with the tech-shy creatives that Drupal would like to embrace. The creative community has such different values and speaks such a different language that it should have a targeted area separate from the community to court it. On the other hand, there is a huge need for a whole tree of Design and UI forums within drupal.org to address the needs of usability and user experience. That need is far too important to leave to a redesigned thread on g.d.o. Thanks for having the courage to share your work-in-progress with all of us. Your team is *spot on* with its approach. Our firm has been wrestling with many of your same issues over and over, to the point that some of these patterns are part of the theory we use in designing sites. If not to validate your thinking, here’s what we’ve learned:

network/portal header – Great idea! We call it a “universal nav” which we use as a valuable strip of real estate at the top to move you around a large site’s different properties. It’s also a good location to let a user log in and log out, and you can use color to reflect this state.

logged in vs. not logged in: you’ve got great approach, because these really are different pages for different audiences. One version should tout the benefits of joining and have very general information for those not familiar with Drupal. The logged-in version should have personalized content and be customizable to a power user.

home page vs. portal: Different people will want to see different information, and you may even want to have separate pages for drupal.com (what a newbie would try first) and a link-packed portal page for a power user. Simplicity is great for a first-time brand experience, but lists of links are great time-savers once you know your way around. Personally, I’d keep a portal page in the spec that’s close in structure to the current d.o home page, and maybe give it the URL of my.drupal.org.

Design site on drupal.org? Design and UI are such loaded issues that you should consider having a home for them on the d.o. site — but also keep a separate site where they can take center stage. “Design” and “usability” can mean _such_ different things to different people, especially when you’re trying to mix developers with the tech-shy creatives that Drupal would like to embrace.

The creative community has such different values and speaks such a different language that it should have a targeted area separate from the community to court it. On the other hand, there is a huge need for a whole tree of Design and UI forums within drupal.org to address the needs of usability and user experience. That need is far too important to leave to a redesigned thread on g.d.o.

]]> By: christopher calicott http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/comment-page-1/#comment-151723 christopher calicott Wed, 24 Sep 2008 19:45:08 +0000 http://www.disambiguity.com/?p=577#comment-151723 sounds good to me! -=- christopher sounds good to me!

-=- christopher

]]> By: moshe weitzman http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/comment-page-1/#comment-151690 moshe weitzman Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:32:36 +0000 http://www.disambiguity.com/?p=577#comment-151690 OK, lets wait for some wireframes for a "designers site". Only then can we really evaluate if the functionality and presentation are a good fit with groups/community. If not a good git, then we should consider dedicating a full site to it. OK, lets wait for some wireframes for a “designers site”. Only then can we really evaluate if the functionality and presentation are a good fit with groups/community. If not a good git, then we should consider dedicating a full site to it.

]]> By: christopher calicott http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/comment-page-1/#comment-151682 christopher calicott Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:03:54 +0000 http://www.disambiguity.com/?p=577#comment-151682 Moshe is an awesome developer, and I understand that from the developer perspective it might not seem like there needs to be a separate design and UI site, as d.o. and g.d.o. are all about functionality, and that's what developers do, but for broad adoption by the great designers of the world, Drupal really does need a place for designers to feel at home, where care is given to the very sense of aesthetic in that environment - one that will be conducive to saying "yes, it can be done with Drupal," and with specific tools presented to them in a palatable way to help them achieve their design goals with Drupal and lowers the intimidation factor that they usually experience when trying to muddle their way into Drupal. For designers, I think that the drupal.org domain creates a bit of a feeling "fish out of water," and it seems to me that in this whole process, and with all the various sites in the domain, it would be reasonable to have one area that strongly appeals to these types of personalities and meets their needs. cheers, christopher Moshe is an awesome developer, and I understand that from the developer perspective it might not seem like there needs to be a separate design and UI site, as d.o. and g.d.o. are all about functionality, and that’s what developers do, but for broad adoption by the great designers of the world, Drupal really does need a place for designers to feel at home, where care is given to the very sense of aesthetic in that environment – one that will be conducive to saying “yes, it can be done with Drupal,” and with specific tools presented to them in a palatable way to help them achieve their design goals with Drupal and lowers the intimidation factor that they usually experience when trying to muddle their way into Drupal. For designers, I think that the drupal.org domain creates a bit of a feeling “fish out of water,” and it seems to me that in this whole process, and with all the various sites in the domain, it would be reasonable to have one area that strongly appeals to these types of personalities and meets their needs.

cheers,
christopher

]]> By: Kieran Lal http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/comment-page-1/#comment-151628 Kieran Lal Wed, 24 Sep 2008 16:38:34 +0000 http://www.disambiguity.com/?p=577#comment-151628 @Moshe - growing the Drupal project may mean growing audience specific properties. Groups has done wonders for local groups. API has done wonders for developers. Let's let a UX/Design section do wonders for designers. A good group of designers came out of Drupalcon Boston to build a new home for Drupal designers, let's give them the room to make it. @Michael Phipps - Comment 20. :-) Right now Drupal.org has a 3.5% sign-in rate per month. Most of the content is freely accessible and the history of the web shows that free access is the way to go, unless you are facebook, grrr. @John Forsythe: nice. @EclipseGC: Re: Technical pain, doesn't front page module handle role (anon, auth) front pages? @Leisa: Should we address revenue from advertising and possibly a Drupal store in the IA? The store is a new requirement, just bubbling up with the rebranding and need to expand our marketing efforts. @Leisa: this IA will help users find things they expect to find. But are there specific IA's which will increase participation in the project? Thanks for everyone's participation. This is really great to see the level of engagement. @Moshe – growing the Drupal project may mean growing audience specific properties. Groups has done wonders for local groups. API has done wonders for developers. Let’s let a UX/Design section do wonders for designers. A good group of designers came out of Drupalcon Boston to build a new home for Drupal designers, let’s give them the room to make it.

@Michael Phipps – Comment 20. :-)

Right now Drupal.org has a 3.5% sign-in rate per month. Most of the content is freely accessible and the history of the web shows that free access is the way to go, unless you are facebook, grrr.

@John Forsythe: nice.

@EclipseGC: Re: Technical pain, doesn’t front page module handle role (anon, auth) front pages?

@Leisa: Should we address revenue from advertising and possibly a Drupal store in the IA? The store is a new requirement, just bubbling up with the rebranding and need to expand our marketing efforts.

@Leisa: this IA will help users find things they expect to find. But are there specific IA’s which will increase participation in the project?

Thanks for everyone’s participation. This is really great to see the level of engagement.

]]> By: Michael Phipps http://www.disambiguity.com/drupalorg-initial-thoughts-on-the-information-architecture/comment-page-1/#comment-151314 Michael Phipps Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:43:13 +0000 http://www.disambiguity.com/?p=577#comment-151314 I just saw the post on your Card Sorting results, and realised that your information architecture has been derived from over 200 users, so I feel my previous comments about asking users what they think aren't appropriate anymore. I just saw the post on your Card Sorting results, and realised that your information architecture has been derived from over 200 users, so I feel my previous comments about asking users what they think aren’t appropriate anymore.

]]>