New Python.org website ?

[Fredrik Lundh]

I disagree completely. I wouldn't touch a new language or technology
without first reading content. Neither would my boss, or any other
manager for that matter. This is not a watch, a garment, a toothpaste or
a burger. It is a software product, which needs a lot of content.

The few words in captions should indeed be conveying the message. Which
brings up a good question - what message does python.org want to convey?
Is beta.python.org doing that?

What puzzles me (and scares me) is that some people seem to think that
anyone would go to python.org and expect a corporate fluff site.

It's like when I asked a "suit" friend with long industry experience to check
the python marketing list; his spontaneous reaction after reading some of
the "we must do this because non-programmers think like this" discussion
was one big WTF-are-these-guys-talking-about-why-do-they-hate-python ?

The current site needs an incremental style overhaul, a less cluttered front
page, and some signs that python.org's actually using modern Python tools
for the site. And it needs to be more alive, both style-wise and content-
wise.

It does not need to treat its target audience (be it developers nor managers)
as simpletons. Companies in the Python space don't do that, so why should
python.org ?

</F>

 

[Fredrik Lundh]

Yes, and I read Playboy for the interviews

if you want the glossy stuff, go to python.com.

In another post, you mention http://www.joelonsoftware.com/ which appears
to be some sort of blog (the current bane of the internet). I immediately
noticed something when visiting Joel using Firefox. **Scrollbars**. The
page wouldn't even fit on the screen! I started to read it, but my face
went numb before I needed to use the scrollbar.

OK for blogging -- not so cool for a book cover.

Of course, I'm a minimalist.

minimalist? you sound like some guy who read a book about web design in
the late nineties, and who've missed virtually everything that has happened
since then. that's not minimalist, that's ignorant.

</F>

 

[Steve Holden]

Tim Parkin wrote:




The pictures are too big, too many and in your face (boastful, as
someone else mentioned). Even in most commercial product sites I see a
single company name/logo or a single quote in a corner somewhere. For
example www.ironport.com, www.informatica.com, www.basecamphq.com... One
great open source site is www.postgresql.org. Everything including
documentation has the same look and feel.

I'm looking at it as someone who is skeptical or knows only little about
Python. "What? Google, NASA!" (click, click.. nothing.. or a single
quote) "Bah! this is bogus". People want to know how something will help
them and why should they use it. It would be awesome if we can pull all
the pythonology success stories into python.org and link exactly one on
the main page (again see www.postgresql.org). Anything less than a case
study does not warrant a picture with a 'learn why..' on it.




Good, but I think there should be only one with a smaller link to case
studies and/or quotes.




So the google link on the home page should perhaps go to this quote
instead of google.com.




Sure, I will work on this.




I think logos might be more effective. Again with links to success
stories with pull quotes highlighting Python's strengths. Pretty
pictures by themselves don't do much. People want to know how it is
different from other things, why it is better and *where* it is better.




These links are very important. A couple of nitpicks about presentation:
1. Why are there two 'documentation' sections on the left?
2. Why does the 'about' section show 3 sub-headings on the main page,
but grows to 6 when clicked?



I like that you are trying to market Python. I think the way it is being
done may be ineffective, or worse, may backfire.



The 3 edited (or stock?) pictures occupying majority of the real estate.
Missing success stories or case studies.



See top of email.



The big pictures are too flashy. The colors and fonts etc. give make it
somewhat cool. Cool is a good thing. But not without content.



Sure. In fact I think the front page intro should be very minimal with 2 or
3 specifically targeted intros in the about section.

Is the current www.python.org written in HTML? If not where can I get
the source?

Cheers,
Shalabh

The current site is mostly HTML, so you can use websucker to get the
(majority of) the content. We also have a well-defined mirror process in
place.

This critique is all very well, but it tends to rely rather heavily on
the words "I think". You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but
please don't think that this new design was created on a whim. There are
many contrary opinions, and like all good designs this one is a compromise.

Now roll your sleeves up and start converting content!

regards
Steve

 

[Fredrik Lundh]

Could you expand on why the backend infrastructure and information
architecture feel like 1998? (it's a bit of an abstract comment and
doesn't offer anything constructive).

it's the kind of tools that people built around then: a bunch of text files,
and a make-style build templating system. to use the tools, you log in
to the web server via a back channel.

An example of a site info architecture that feels like 2005 would be
good. Also an example of a backend architecture that isn't like 1998
would be good too.

anything that supports edit-though-the-web and does the final composition
by composing HTML information sets would be more 2006.

the easiest way to get there would be to use a MoinMoin instance to main-
tain the content, and a separate renderer to generate static pages for the
main site (possibly using Cheetah or Kid as template languages).

</F>

 

[Steve Holden]

Steve Holden:





Thanks for the clarification.

A pleasure.

I hope it is not counted against me that I am the first one to point
out that the logo is shaped like a cross. There might be many
explanations for this; but sooner or later a person with a different
background than the ones you knew would have likely noted the same.
With that said, however, none of this affects the point that the logo
is indeed shaped like I note. (Even the red cross of the International
Committee of the Red Cross is shaped like a plus sign:
http://www.icrc.org/).

I suppose someone had to point it out, so the fact that you are the
first certainly won't be held against you in *this* reader's mind
anyway. And I cannot deny that the outline of the logo is that of a
cross - there would be little point denying a simple truth.

And why ask with any trepidation, Steve? People of different
backgrounds have dissimilar sensitivities. I hope you agree that it
would be unfair to blame people for such deeply personal affairs. If
trepidation on the part of even the Red Cross was enough to cancel such
sensitivities, we would not have had a Red Crescent or a cooperation
between them. If not proving one's subscription to some set of beliefs,
such symbols at least disprove the same for others.

The trepidation was accounted for solely by a concern that Python would
become involved in any kind of religious controversy, or that someone of
extreme views might claim that Python was associated with, or against, a
particular religious belief. Quite apart from the fact that language
choice should not be a religious issue -), you are correct in saying
that we must be mindful of sensitivities; as I mentioned, the outline of
the logo hasn't been raised in the year since it was first mooted. I
hope this doesn't mean we need *two* Python logos!

I do realize that I have no say in the decisions affecting Python's
current and future plans. But it makes sense to think that like any
other marketed product, Python must take into consideration the nature
of its target audience. And if it is to appeal to international users,
then points of deep contention are better avoided. Don't you agree? I
am glad the shape has no significance and I thank you for patience.

Absolutely happy to help. You have as much say in Python's affairs as
any other user, and are just as entitled to comment. I certainly
wouldn't want to limit its popularity in any part of the world simply
because of a poor choice of graphic. Perhaps when a further redesign is
mooted we can ensure that corners are even more rounded ;-)

regards
Steve

 

[Brian van den Broek]

Steve Holden said unto the world upon 11/01/06 04:44 AM:

http://beta.python.org

A few minor points about the design:

The "Using Python for . . ." for section on the right is expectation
violating in several ways:

1) Each two lines have 3 separate links, but all go to the same place.
Much better, I think, to make the entire two lines one link.
2) Alternating lines in slightly different colours briefly made me
wonder if a visited/not visited distinction was being marked. The
difference is also a bit too subtle; I wasn't entirely sure it was
there at first.
3) The second line of every pair seems badly spaced, e.g. "ServersPeer
to Peer". (This is with Firefox 1.07 running on Linux.)
4) Even if the first and second lines are kept as separate parallel
links, that there are two links in the second line, and that they
break on subject seems wrong as the whitespace makes the "link chunks"
and "text chunks" fail to coincide.

None of that is critical, but all of it is a bit puzzling.


A suggestion:
I think it would be a good thing if the wiki were prominently linked
somewhere. Perhaps not on the main page, but surely in somewhere such
as the community or documentation navigation submenus.

Best to all,

Brian vdB

 

[Fredrik Lundh]

This critique is all very well, but it tends to rely rather heavily on
the words "I think". You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but
please don't think that this new design was created on a whim.

you keep saying that, but whenever the analysis that led up to the
suggested approach (which is broken in multiple ways) was made, it
wasn't very recently.

what makes you so sure that what was perceived as correct among
a small group of self-selected python marketers in 2002-2003 is still
the best way to handle Python's most valuable web asset ?

</F>

 

[Tim Parkin]

What puzzles me (and scares me) is that some people seem to think that
anyone would go to python.org and expect a corporate fluff site.

It's like when I asked a "suit" friend with long industry experience to check
the python marketing list; his spontaneous reaction after reading some of
the "we must do this because non-programmers think like this" discussion
was one big WTF-are-these-guys-talking-about-why-do-they-hate-python ?

If you'd followed the conversation, we actually asked a sample of
non-programmers and a few company decision makers what there
expectations were.. You may have seen a few ill informed comments on the
python list (but tell me what list you can go on that doesn't).

The current site needs an incremental style overhaul, a less cluttered front
page, and some signs that python.org's actually using modern Python tools
for the site. And it needs to be more alive, both style-wise and content-
wise.

Thats what we've done.

It does not need to treat its target audience (be it developers nor managers)
as simpletons. Companies in the Python space don't do that, so why should
python.org ?

I haven't got a clue what you are on about with the simpleton thing.. Is
this related to another conversation

it's the kind of tools that people built around then: a bunch of text
files, and a make-style build templating system. to use the tools,
you log in to the web server via a back channel.

In most circles it is considered a 'good thing' that data is stored in a
format that can be edited by hand. Of course we could have stuffed it
all in a database or stored it as xml.. would this have been more 2006.

anything that supports edit-though-the-web and does the final
composition by composing HTML information sets would be more 2006.
the easiest way to get there would be to use a MoinMoin instance to
maintain the content, and a separate renderer to generate static pages
for the main site (possibly using Cheetah or Kid as
templateanguages).

It would be apparent to you if you'd read around (even within this list)
that the website is ultimately intended to have 'through the web'
editing tools. You'd also know that one of the biggest acheivements so
far is the separation of template from data from content so that
'information sets' actually exist in the first place. This also means
that when someone designs a better template (as they may well do) it can
be easily changed in the future.

We also don't really want to have a proliferation of text formats and as
a lot of the website is already written using restructured text, this is
the format thats been recommended. A wiki is not a website and to try to
shoehorn a wiki into a content management system is not a good final
goal. We are adding facilities to use the wiki to manage some pages in
near future as part of migration.

However, the priority was to do certain things first.

1) Separate content from data from presentation is as complete a way as
possible (for which nevow templates, which contain no programmatic
componenets are suitable).

2) Ensure that the system is usable using basic text editing tools

3) Build the website using the latest techniques ensuring accessibility
and usability. The site is XHTML and uses CSS for layout. It also offers
legacy style sheets for netscape and has been tested in speech readers
and text browsers. how quaint..

4) Needed someone to actually do something ....

The last item seems to be the one that has hit the most hurdles. As I
remember you were a member of the marketing list and have had many
opportunities to contribute constructively at planning time.

If you could choose to be constructive in either offering useful changes
that would make sense at this point in time or offereing to provide help
that would be greatly appreciated.

I'm afraid I won't be able to respond at length to any more posts..
There is still a lot of work to be done to get the website live.

Tim Parkin

 

[Tim Parkin]

Steve Holden wrote:




you keep saying that, but whenever the analysis that led up to the
suggested approach (which is broken in multiple ways) was made, it
wasn't very recently.

what makes you so sure that what was perceived as correct among
a small group of self-selected python marketers in 2002-2003 is still
the best way to handle Python's most valuable web asset ?

We're not but they were the only people that were bothered to do
anything.. If I remember, you were one of the people that had an
opportunity to contribute but didn't... As for self selected, anybody
was free to join and help and it was even posted to the mailing list and
mentioned on numerous blogs.

How about designing a website and showing us what you think would be a
good idea? Or suggesting some way of managing all of the content and
building the system. Or taking a screenshot of what is there and
modifying it to show how you would like it changed.

You are coming across has having a chip on your shoulder about something
but you are not being clear exactly what it is?

Tim

 

[Magnus Lycka]

The trepidation was accounted for solely by a concern that Python would
become involved in any kind of religious controversy, or that someone of
extreme views might claim that Python was associated with, or against, a
particular religious belief.

I'm sure there are a number of places where people without extreme views
react strongly to christian symbols--whether the reasons for this are
well founded or not.

ASEA, the A-part of the ABB group, stopped using their old logo in 1933.
They realized that what used to be a symbol for electrical motors in
schematic diagrams had become associated with something entirely
different. In 1933 the general opinion on nazis weren't nearly as
negative as it is now, but whatever you thought about politics, ASEA's
old logo no longer gave the right associations to people. On the other
hand, people on Bali don't seem to worry a bit about the swastikas on
their shrines and temples. Different context.

We can obviously argue on how much we should worry about the assocations
people in various corners of thge world get, whatever we intended. In
Sweden, the python snake has for some reason become associated with bad
smells. (I think it was Pippi Longstocking who used an expresion that
got stuck in the souls of the Swedes--it's all Astrid Lindgren's fault.)
I don't expect Guido to rename Python for that reason (Monty would feel
fairly neutral in Sweden), but it sometimes seem to be a disadvantage.
I think some people I've tried to convince would have been more
impressed if Python had been called XYZ or whatever...

Here at work, our conference rooms are named after old norse gods, and
the new room that was named Vile, was rapidly renamed Vili, when people
thought about the meaning of "vile" in English.

Actually, considering the status snakes have in christian tradition, I
guess you could claim that the snakes neutralize the cross!

Personally, I think it looks more like plus sign than like a cross.

Quite apart from the fact that language
choice should not be a religious issue -), you are correct in saying
that we must be mindful of sensitivities; as I mentioned, the outline of
the logo hasn't been raised in the year since it was first mooted. I
hope this doesn't mean we need *two* Python logos!

It's probably possible to make a Python logo that doesn't look
like any religious symbol. I think the plus sign shaped logo
had some advantages though. It's not very pretty, but it's simple
and a plus is something positive, something that adds value...

 

[Fredrik Lundh]

How about designing a website and showing us what you think would be a
good idea? Or suggesting some way of managing all of the content and
building the system.

I think I just did that:

the easiest way to get there would be to use a MoinMoin instance to main-
tain the content, and a separate renderer to generate static pages for the
main site (possibly using Cheetah or Kid as template languages).

to which you responded

A wiki is not a website and to try to shoehorn a wiki into a content manage-
ment system is not a good final goal.

which is an interesting thing to say at a time when "wikipedia" has
joined "google" and "blog" as the internet things that everyone has
heard about...

Or taking a screenshot of what is there and modifying it to show how you
would like it changed.

I have opinions about the backend, and you're turning it into a front-
page design issue ? or did you wonder what the backend could look
like ?

http://moinmoin.wikiwikiweb.de

</F>

 

[Steve Holden]

Fredrik Lundh wrote: [various stuff]
It would be apparent to you if you'd read around (even within this list)
that the website is ultimately intended to have 'through the web'
editing tools. You'd also know that one of the biggest acheivements so
far is the separation of template from data from content so that
'information sets' actually exist in the first place. This also means
that when someone designs a better template (as they may well do) it can
be easily changed in the future.

We also don't really want to have a proliferation of text formats and as
a lot of the website is already written using restructured text, this is
the format thats been recommended. A wiki is not a website and to try to
shoehorn a wiki into a content management system is not a good final
goal. We are adding facilities to use the wiki to manage some pages in
near future as part of migration.

However, the priority was to do certain things first.

1) Separate content from data from presentation is as complete a way as
possible (for which nevow templates, which contain no programmatic
componenets are suitable).

2) Ensure that the system is usable using basic text editing tools

3) Build the website using the latest techniques ensuring accessibility
and usability. The site is XHTML and uses CSS for layout. It also offers
legacy style sheets for netscape and has been tested in speech readers
and text browsers. how quaint..

4) Needed someone to actually do something ....

The last item seems to be the one that has hit the most hurdles. As I
remember you were a member of the marketing list and have had many
opportunities to contribute constructively at planning time.

If you could choose to be constructive in either offering useful changes
that would make sense at this point in time or offereing to provide help
that would be greatly appreciated.

I'm afraid I won't be able to respond at length to any more posts..
There is still a lot of work to be done to get the website live.

The most valid point that Fredrik makes is the convenience and
desirability of through-the-web editing. I hope he'll use some of his
undoubted energy to examine the current systems design and produce a
through-the-web interface for us. Once the new documentation site is up
and running, that is

Seriously, I'm not aware of anything about the current design that would
prohibit through-the-web editing. Neither am I aware of anyone spending
the time to produce it. As you indicated, there are other priorities
just at the moment.

regards
Steve

 

[Fredrik Lundh]

Steve Holden wrote

As you indicated, there are other priorities just at the moment.

you're complaining about the lack of manpower, and still think that lowering
the threshold for contributions is not a priority ? at this point, this should
be your *only* priority.

I mean, getting this from a long-time python contributor that decided to
help out

My first attempt ended almost immediately. Too much software
to download and install for anything like casual use.

should be a rather strong indicator that the project isn't on the right track.

(and it sure isn't the only indicator; I still claim that the analysis is flawed,
and that the www.python.org front-page asset shouldn't be reserved for a
target audience that doesn't exist. but that's a separate problem; if you
solve the threshold problem, we can deal with that later. if you don't, we
might get stuck with the new design for as long as we've had the old one).

Once the new documentation site is up and running, that is

that's an interesting comparision: it took me about 30 minutes to convert
10+ megabytes of reference material into a usable (X)HTML infoset (that
is, with isolated content and structural information derived from the source
material), and a few hours to get old source->new source->render tool-
chain to a state where most conversion bugs turns out to be typos in the
original documents (aka "the 80% of the remaining 20%" level).

if converting the old content is and has been the biggest problem in the
beta.python.org project, it seems to me as if you might not be doing things
in the easiest possible way...

</F>

 

[Steve Holden]

Steve Holden wrote




you're complaining about the lack of manpower, and still think that lowering
the threshold for contributions is not a priority ? at this point, this should
be your *only* priority.

I mean, getting this from a long-time python contributor that decided to
help out

My first attempt ended almost immediately. Too much software
to download and install for anything like casual use.

should be a rather strong indicator that the project isn't on the right track.

Or that the instructions being followed were those for producing a local
copy of the website rather than editing the beta site content (mea
culpa, since I believe 'twas I who gave the instructions).

(and it sure isn't the only indicator; I still claim that the analysis is flawed,
and that the www.python.org front-page asset shouldn't be reserved for a
target audience that doesn't exist. but that's a separate problem; if you
solve the threshold problem, we can deal with that later. if you don't, we
might get stuck with the new design for as long as we've had the old one).

I don't think it's *reserved* for anyone. The idea is to try and offer a
system that allows easy changes to the content while maintaining a
relatively clean design.

that's an interesting comparision: it took me about 30 minutes to convert
10+ megabytes of reference material into a usable (X)HTML infoset (that
is, with isolated content and structural information derived from the source
material), and a few hours to get old source->new source->render tool-
chain to a state where most conversion bugs turns out to be typos in the
original documents (aka "the 80% of the remaining 20%" level).

if converting the old content is and has been the biggest problem in the
beta.python.org project, it seems to me as if you might not be doing things
in the easiest possible way...

Well I can't disagree with that. Want to help?

regards
Steve

 

[Markus Wankus]

I think I just did that:

the easiest way to get there would be to use a MoinMoin instance to main-
tain the content, and a separate renderer to generate static pages for the
main site (possibly using Cheetah or Kid as template languages).

to which you responded

A wiki is not a website and to try to shoehorn a wiki into a content manage-
ment system is not a good final goal.

which is an interesting thing to say at a time when "wikipedia" has
joined "google" and "blog" as the internet things that everyone has
heard about...

Well I happen to agree whole-heartedly with Tim on that one. I can't
stand trying to navigate some of these Wiki-trying-to-be-website pages.
It is impossible to find anything on most of them (notice I didn't say
all..there are exceptions). It seems like they cater to people who:

a) Get some sort of sick pleasure out of searching webpages by manually
constructing regular expressions.
b) Love the fact that every other word is a link and end up in a 3 hour
link-clinking session until they have visited every link.

Navigating a Wiki to me feels more like trying to find the proverbial
needle in a haystack, or perhaps it is more like painting a wall by
flinging paint at it with a spoon. But maybe that's just me. I
sometimes have a compulsion for methodically checking everything in a
sane order. That's probably just my code review skills, or
dungeon-crawling instincts kicking in. ;o)

M.

 

[Markus Wankus]

<whisper>
If you build it, they will come.
</whisper>

 

[Fredrik Lundh]

Well I happen to agree whole-heartedly with Tim on that one. I can't
stand trying to navigate some of these Wiki-trying-to-be-website pages.
It is impossible to find anything on most of them (notice I didn't say
all..there are exceptions). It seems like they cater to people who:

Nobody's expecting the *user* to navigate wiki pages. It's a tool for the content
providers. And they don't have to navigate anything either; an "edit" link (or sym-
bol) in a convenient location on each page is all you need.

</F>

 

[Tim Parkin]

Steve Holden wrote




you're complaining about the lack of manpower, and still think that lowering
the threshold for contributions is not a priority ? at this point, this should
be your *only* priority.

If you want to contribute, then do so.. If we had more people offering
to contribute then this would be a priority. However despite trying to
get people to contribute for over two years, I still ended up doing
pretty much everything myself. And despite continued calls for people to
help and offers of optimising the install process and writing additional
documentation if they wanted to, we've only had four offers of help, of
which only myself, Steve Holden and Andrew Kuchling have been doing
anything significant.

It would be loveley to have a large team of volunteers producing a
consensus on approach to the website build. It would also be greate to
have lots of people to put the effort into it. I think the same can be
said for any open source project. However, just like open source
projects, you have to choose based more on who is willing to do anything
than on who is offering the ideal solution. (there are normally a lot
more of the latter than of the former)

I mean, getting this from a long-time python contributor that decided to
help out

My first attempt ended almost immediately. Too much software
to download and install for anything like casual use.

should be a rather strong indicator that the project isn't on the right track.

I think the follow on post saying "maybe I misread the directions" and
the fact that you can edit/contribute content without having to use the
full build tool should be noted (you can use a text editor if you
like... how 1976). The project is on the right track as it's the only
track that anybody was bothered to lay.

(and it sure isn't the only indicator; I still claim that the analysis is flawed,
and that the www.python.org front-page asset shouldn't be reserved for a
target audience that doesn't exist. but that's a separate problem; if you
solve the threshold problem, we can deal with that later. if you don't, we
might get stuck with the new design for as long as we've had the old one).

I don't think the front page is reserved for an audience that doesn't exist.

The front page is trying to serve many purposes for many audiences. If
you had read the documents that had been available online during the
extensive initial discussions, you would know what the estimated split
in the audience was and also know why the balance of content on the home
page is the way it is. The 'threshold problem' I think you are talking
about (it would help if you could be more specific about what a
'threshold problem' really is) is more relevant to managing content than
design and templating.

that's an interesting comparision: it took me about 30 minutes to convert
10+ megabytes of reference material into a usable (X)HTML infoset (that
is, with isolated content and structural information derived from the source
material), and a few hours to get old source->new source->render tool-
chain to a state where most conversion bugs turns out to be typos in the
original documents (aka "the 80% of the remaining 20%" level).

if converting the old content is and has been the biggest problem in the
beta.python.org project, it seems to me as if you might not be doing things
in the easiest possible way...

Good and congratulations, it shows that the source code is well
formatted/consistent - I wish the rest of the website html/data were so.
If you are suggesting that your skills can do this with the rest of the
site content then please, please help!!

In fact I will ask you now, publicly, if you are willing to offer your
services to help convert the documentation and exsiting content over to
the new website?

If you are then your services will be greatly appreciated and I'm sure
we can take the discussion of the balance of the home page and future
web based management of the content elsewhere and invite anyone who
wishes to participate to join us. We can then post our conclusions once
we've reached some consensus.

If we can get the rest of the content (which doesn't include fancy
pictures) over to the new site then we'll have a great foundation for
making further additions and I'd really like a few more people to help
get us there.

I really can't afford a lot of time to discuss issues that have already
been discussed far too many times. If we can get down to specifics of
what you are offering and what you expect other people to do to help
you, then we should be able to keep conversations a lot shorter.

Tim

 

[skip]

Roel> I don't agree. I read websites in search for information
Roel> (content), not to find advertisements. If a site I want to visit
Roel> looks too much like an advertisement, I handle it the same as I
Roel> handle any other advertisement: throw it away.

Sure, but that's not what JW said. He said that *when looking at ads* the
only bits of content people read are the captions of the pictures. He said
nothing about what people read when they are reading non-advertising
content.

Skip

 

[Fredrik Lundh]

If you want to contribute, then do so...

so make it easy to contribute. I'm sure the project sponsors (PSF?) would
be willing to wait a little longer if the site had good support for distributed
maintenance from the start.

Good and congratulations, it shows that the source code is well
formatted/consistent - I wish the rest of the website html/data were so.
If you are suggesting that your skills can do this with the rest of the
site content then please, please help!!

In fact I will ask you now, publicly, if you are willing to offer your
services to help convert the documentation and exsiting content over to
the new website?

to what target environment? a wiki? sure. the current homebrewn solution?
probably not; way too much new technology to learn, and absolutely nothing
that I'm likely to end up using in any other context.

</F>