The project link is "half-fixed", still .oOo.Project, which makes me think it's intentional, but the fact that the trailing .oOo. was removed leaves me unsure. Was this just a typo? --Curtbeckmann 15:06, 11 October 2006 (PDT)

No, not a typo, just playing around trying to find something that looks good. I will try another... maybe more similar to the arrows used in the project captions. --> Projects <--. --Lonny 16:30, 11 October 2006 (PDT)

Looks better, thanks. --24.6.122.219 19:52, 11 October 2006 (PDT)

I must say that I prefer the current version (Projects, Topics, Programs, etc) but will of course defer to others. Apologies if I exceeded my adminship, but at least we know it works, from a system perspective at least. --Curtbeckmann 13:13, 17 October 2006 (PDT)

I concede to no different lettering for Projects, but I still do not like the plural, especially since it now reads projects area, topics area, etc. I prefer project area. What do you think? --Lonny 16:09, 17 October 2006 (PDT)

Hmm. My concern is that "Project" makes it sound like there is just one. Ditto for the other stuff. That seems legit because headings (navigation, areas, etc) just disappear into the background and the links are read alone. Seems like another approach might be to alter the labels to be "Project Area", etc, which removes doubt. Alternatively, we could alter the heading to be "key content" or something, but "Projects Content" could still be uncomfortable.

Question: do you feel like "Users Community" doesn't work? "Organizations Community"? In theory, should those be singular also? I like "Users" and "Orgs"...

By the way, I want to be clear that I don't at all regard these discussions pointless. (Hard to read one's tone in text.) By wrestling with these details we'll end up with something better...

So, in answer to your question, I'm probably as uncomfortable with singular project as you are with the plural. Damn. Oh! Here's a flash! Change the header to "Articles" or "article areas", or maybe "articles on..." Hmm. Not as good as I thought it would be, but still may offer a way out.

Chris, help us out with a tie breaker :-) --Curtbeckmann 18:12, 17 October 2006 (PDT)

This all relates to a on-going conversation about what areas are. I would like to have a teleconference with the two of you sometime to discuss it. Before that time I will try to lay out my vision more clearly. I will probably get to it on Saturday. Until that time the navbar can stay how it is. Thank you. --Lonny 19:08, 17 October 2006 (PDT)

Split, add portals[edit source]

I made some changes - split the first section, added 2 portals under "topic areas", and tried to simplify headers a little (but found I had to keep the first header as 2 words, for some reason). Hope there's no problem with that. How does it look? Any other ideas? --Chriswaterguy 20:03, 13 June 2008 (PDT)

This pushes the search bar below the fold for many computers. I think we should change it back until we have the search bar up high and accessible.

In a few months, I think we should condense our sidebar even further for eventual integration with the forums. In a year, I think we should have contextual page based sidebars. In 1.5 years I think we should have two sidebars (left and right) that are contextual, user settable and based upon where a visitor has come from. After that I think that browsers will probably have more ability and screens more variability so that floating, user-set bars may replace our sidebars.... but this is just a thought.

Thank you, -Lonny 05:18, 15 June 2008 (PDT)

I think that the new wider sidebar renders over part of the content window when using Internet Explorer... maybe there is a way to fix this. -Lonny 07:57-approx, 16 June 2008 (PDT)

Great thoughts, and thanks for picking up those problems that I completely overlooked. Didn't realize sidebar width could have that effect and completely forgot about the search box issue now that I'm using the shiny beta skin by Cat Laine.

I reverted my changes, and made some different changes with no net additions, swapping what I think are lower value links for higher value ones for most users. How is that now?

btw, "Construction / Materials" takes up 2 lines on my screen - how about on other screens? --Chriswaterguy 04:21, 17 June 2008 (PDT)