[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Evergreen Web Site Strategy

[Lori Bowen Ayre]

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the thorough responses.  Without addressing anything else, let me
just clarify one misunderstanding you may have.  The Communication Committee
has initiated a three pronged offensive and "WIG" or the Web Team (and the
subject of these guidelines) is just one.  The Web Team's goal is to to
identify all the Evergreen user groups that are stakeholders in the
evergreen-ils.org website, to undertake a needs assessment process, perform
a content inventory, and to develop a plan for revamping the
evergreen-ils.org website according to what we find. We weren't really
thinking of touching Launchpad so much as thinking about the role of
Launchpad and interfacing with Launchpad vis-a-vis everything else we learn.
 That's one focus of work being done by the Communication Committee.

Another subset of us are pursing the very items you describe in your Web
Site Implementation Group (thanks for suggesting a name for that team!).
 This group will be working on the current site and seeing what can be done
to make improvements in the near term. This group will also benefit from the
longer term process being undertaken by the WIG but won't be limited by
that.

The third prong is general Communications issues.  We will be suggesting
some draft guidelines for group communications (i.e. you have accepted
responsiblity to accomplish something for the community....how to you
communicate, where do you put stuff, etc) so that other group don't have to
crash and burn like the Web Team did in our first foray into that muddy
water!  Again, those will be draft guidelines and we will be seeking
feedback.

And just FYI to everyone, here is where the Communication/Web Team is
living:
http://www.evergreen-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=evergreen_community_web_team_planning_committee_page

I'll let others chime in with thoughts on your other comments.

Lori

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Dan Scott <dan at coffeecode.net> wrote:

> Hi Anoop:
>
> I'm sorry to see that you haven't had much feedback so far! I'll try
> to get the ball rolling.
>
> On 5 November 2010 13:00, Anoop Atre <anoop.atre at mnsu.edu> wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> > An announcement to the list detailing the work of the Evergreen
> > Communication Committee and its Website Interest Group was sent out early
> > October. We promised that both of these groups would be seeking feedback
> > from the community. As promised, the Website Interest Group (WIG) is
> > interested in your thoughts about and ideas for the Evergreen website.
> >
> > WIG has started the brainstorming and planning process for the long-term
> > vision for the Evergreen website. We're looking for community feedback on
> > our strategic plan and requirements. Our first draft is below and we'd
> like
> > to know what the community wants to see in the Evergreen website.
> > Suggestions for things that should be added, taken away or changed in our
> > initial list of ideas are most welcome.
>
> At a very low-level, I'm not sure whether these requirements allow for
> multiple web sites. "an easy-to-use, comprehensive portal" suggests
> one Web site to rule them all, which would be (in my opinion) a
> mistake. For example, I would argue that our adoption of Launchpad,
> perhaps in combination with the wiki, is "a mechanism for Evergreen
> users to share development plans, co-sponsor development projects, and
> submit development requests and bug reports", and it would seem to me
> to be a huge waste of resources to try to recreate it.
>
> Hmm. When you list strategic goals for the Web site, I pretty much
> immediately wonder whether these are aligned with the community's
> strategic goals (and then I hate myself for thinking like an
> administrator, but that's a different issue). WIG could adopt the
> draft as working strategic goals, but if we think we have an overall
> mission for Evergreen, that should be front and centre on the landing
> page of http://evergreen-ils.org/ shouldn't it? Taking that approach,
> the mission for Evergreen on the development side, since at least
> 2006, is that it be "stable, robust, flexible, secure, and
> user-friendly". Perhaps we need a separate discussion to tease out an
> overall mission for Evergreen.
>
> I think that we could and should drop some of the oblique terminology
> where possible, as this would help drive out requirements and/or steps
> to take to address certain goals. For example, if "Strategic Goal #3:
> Facilitate development of multi-faceted support network for Evergreen
> users." really means "Reduce Evergreen's reliance on Equinox for the
> bulk of its development and support needs", it seems like this
> overlaps with "Strategic Goal #2: Encourage growth of a healthy
> developer community" ... and in either case, rather than jumping
> directly to "What do we need to do with the Web site to achieve this
> goal?", it might be better answered by steps such as "Hire developers
> locally, give them training and time to develop their
> Evergreen-specific skills, and set an expectation that they will
> participate in the Evergreen development community" and perhaps "Get
> Evergreen packaged in Linux distributions so that it will be much more
> accessible to a broader audience of potential developers", as just
> some initial thoughts.
>
> "Provide technical information needed by current and future Evergreen
> developers" identifies a broad gap that's much more than just the Web
> site in scope; it's really "Produce more entry-level developer
> documentation, training, and sample code" (some of which will probably
> live on the Web site, but a lot of writing and curriculum development
> needs to happen before the Web site needs to get involved).
>
> On a similar angle, "Strategic Goal #4: Encourage widespread adoption
> of Evergreen by the library community worldwide." may be an implicit
> goal for the community, for which the Web site could take tactical
> steps (for example, "Web pages should be able to be translated and
> maintained in sync across all languages") vs. non-Web site tactics
> such as advocacy requirements ("Send Evergreen community members to
> international library conferences in exotic locations to spread the
> word about Evergreen" -- okay, more realistically, dent and tweet and
> blog -- or even more importantly -- create a great stable, robust,
> flexible, secure, and user-friendly library system and provide
> excellent, up-to-date documentation for it) and development
> requirements ("Support right-to-left languages", "Add
> internationalization support to pages developed using
> Template::Toolkit") and community requirements ("Find an
> internationalization coordinator"). But listing that as a strategic
> goal for the Web site itself seems like it's over-reaching.
>
> That might be the primary thing that bothers me about a fragmented
> approach like this: rather than starting with a general discussion
> about a problem the community has, and what steps we can take to
> tackle those problems on various fronts, and who can actually do the
> work required to tackle those problems, starting from the perspective
> of just one particular Interest Group skews the discussion
> significantly.
>
> Of course, we can talk about goals and requirements and tactics, but I
> think we would all agree that the current Web site could use some
> love, and I know the WIG wants to give it some love, but ultimately it
> takes people doing work to make a tangible difference. So could I
> suggest a parallel approach (assuming that there will be some other
> discussion about community-level goals and challenges)? Could WIG be
> redefined to mean "Web site Implementation Group", and start by
> finding one concrete gap between our community's needs for a website
> and our current Web presence that you think needs to be tackled
> (perhaps drawn from the current draft list of goals/requirements),
> discuss that particular gap that you want to tackle with possible
> solutions in more detail on the mailing list, and then actually tackle
> the problem (perhaps in a few different ways, depending on how much
> effort is required), inviting feedback while the solution to that
> problem gets developed?
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20101111/8703ec8f/attachment-0001.htm