Last modified by Ecaterina Moraru on 2013/11/13 12:48
From version 8.1
edited by Ecaterina Valica
on 2010/03/19 19:01
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 17.1
edited by Ecaterina Valica
on 2010/03/25 11:41
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Parent
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +Improvements.XWikiOrgv2
Content
... ... @@ -143,11 +143,10 @@
143 143   <li><a href="">Profiling</a></li>
144 144   </ul>
145 145   </div>
146 -<div class="jmegaclear">&nbsp;</div>
146 +<div class="clearfloats">&nbsp;</div>
147 147  </div></div>
148 148  {{/html}}
149 149  
150 -== MindMap ==
151 151  
152 152  The Mindmap is public and can be edited (password protected)
153 153  Url: http://www.mindmeister.com/maps/public_map_shell/8557858/xt4
XWiki.XWikiComments[0]
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +xwiki:XWiki.Marta
Comment
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,8 @@
1 +I like the fat footer.
2 +
3 +Some random questions and suggestions:
4 +* Demo sounds a bit "business-y"... Couldn't it be named "Playground" (since I suppose it is the link to playground.xwiki.org anyway)?
5 +* The first group of links in the Documentation column is the only one without a title, and for this reason it looks a bit misplaced. As a quick fix, I'd move them to the bottom of the column, under the title "Miscellaneous" (or something like that).
6 +* Also in the Documentation column: in my opinion, the natural order (wrt the amount of knowledge) is: User's Guide, Admin's Guide, Dev's Guide.
7 +* In the Development column: I'm not sure "Playing with XWiki" is the right title for the second group, I'd go for something more serious here.
8 +* General: I think the order of the topics should be consistent as much as possible in the menu and footer.
Date
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2010-03-23 20:01:44.0
XWiki.XWikiComments[1]
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +xwiki:XWiki.VincentMassol
Comment
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,5 @@
1 +Stupid question: Why do we need such a footer if all these entries are available from the menus at the top?
2 +
3 +I feel it may make the page more heavy than it could be, especially on pages that have little content and where you see both the header and footer.
4 +
5 +I don't have a strong opinion right now but I'm just curious about the rationale for the fat footer.
Date
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2010-03-24 07:28:01.0
XWiki.XWikiComments[2]
Author
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +xwiki:XWiki.Marta
Comment
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +It's like a constantly available site map. It helps the user discover the site, because it gives a good overview of the available information (here, you can see it all at once, while the upper menu can be explored one entry at a time). Also, normally it's not very intrusive, because such footers are supposed to appear in smaller print and lower contrast.
Date
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +2010-03-24 14:26:31.0
Reply To
... ... @@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
1 +1