One of the information architecture questions we need to resolve for Drupal.org is whether we try to make it one cohesive website experience, or whether (as it is now) there is a ‘family’ of mini-sites that make up the online experience of Drupal.
It seems to me that it has been mostly through the organic growth of the site and of Drupal itself, some technical and perhaps some social issues that have lead to the propagation of all these mini sites. Creating a new site helped get the required content or functionality up and running where as, if it had to go into the Drupal.org infrastructure it may never have come into existence.
Some of the mini-sites theoretically appeal to all users (for example, the ‘groups’ should have almost universal appeal. Others, like the API, are perhaps more targeted towards the technical audience.
The question now is – given that we essentially have a blank sheet – should we attempt to pull everything back in under the umbrella of a single ‘drupal.org’ entity?
The proposed Information Architecture that we received as a part of the RFP for this project seemed to indicate that this was the preferred approach (ref:
In my experience, however, a better experience is usually created by trying to architect content into one website, rather than a family of sites. There are, obviously, exceptions to this!
I’m interested in hearing what you think about this question? What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of the ‘one site’ approach? What, if any, content should be shelved onto a separate site, and why?