[155994] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NANOG Website Redesign Project
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robert E. Seastrom)
Mon Sep 3 10:03:22 2012
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
From: "Robert E. Seastrom" <rs@seastrom.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 10:01:41 -0400
In-Reply-To: <m21uijcpnz.wl%randy@psg.com> (Randy Bush's message of "Mon,
03 Sep 2012 18:27:12 +0700")
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>,
Randy Epstein <repstein@hostleasing.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> writes:
>> NANOG is in the process of completely redeveloping its website
>> (http://www.nanog.org) and is looking for feedback from the community
>> and NANOG members.
>
> i have been exceedingly impressed by the current web site's serious
> feature set implemented without a whole bunch of web glorp. i use it as
> an example when folk want to start barfing java and all that crap at me.
I am not a fan of "fsmenu.js", which persists on nanog.org even when
one clicks on the "text site" link, which to my way of thinking ought
to be free of such stuff.
I'm not an accessibility expert, but animated menus don't smell
"accessible" to me unless input devices and screen readers have gotten
a whole lot better while I was not paying attention.
There are various accessibility standards - BS 8878:2010 (UK), Section
508 (US, a bit of a period piece) to name a couple. Which one gets
chosen is not as important as choosing one and then subjecting the
site to a periodic audit to make sure it is "clean".
In my limited experience, conformance to such standards tends to make
the site load more quickly and feel more snappy (which benefits
everyone) though the difference may be fairly small on today's fast
links.
A clear statement of the goals of the redesign may inform the
direction one's efforts take.
My $0.02...
-r
