The system admin committee does not feel equipped to comment on UX experience, and asks for a proposal from the marketing committee. I have written the above after learning about discourse, and trying to determine what is the least bother.
While the motion held open for 2 weeks, new projects are being setup now, so effective feedback needs to be in ahead of Friday marketing meeting.
Peter Batty
Nicolas Bozon
Astrid Emde
Jody Garnett +1 initial motion
Peter Mooney
Laura Mugeha +1
Enock Seth Nyamador
Adam Steer
Guido Stein
Community support:
Regina Obe +1
Jorge Sanz +1
Feedback welcome speak up!
Here are some visual example:
top-level public project with sub-categories by language:
Just a note. I do feel while it’s great to propose a UI experience category setup down to project levels, we should delegate to projects for the final decision of how their sub categories are named / slugged etc.
Thanks @robe I will mark subcategory named slugged as optional.
However part of the transition trouble right now is too little guidance. I think having a default recommendation would be very much appreciated.
As example:
It was not obvious to me that the category slugs geoserver / user ends up geoserver-user mailing list name unless someone points it out first.
It was not until I watched geoserver / geoserver-user get setup that I understood that blindly reusing the name of the mailing list (my first instinct) would result in a poor experience.
Thanks for working on the proposal @jive. It makes sense to me, and I agree with enforcing the top-level categories and then making the opinionated suggestion of those defaults, leaving projects and initiatives to deviate from it if they see fit.
I don’t really have an opinion on enforcing any color/branding. Still, I’d at least encourage everyone to try to follow standard practice and leverage each project/committee’s existing branding (logos, banners, etc.) to make each forum a bit of its own.