I think zope.org is quite nice. Its navigation is consistent and fairly easy to use. The focus is clearly on content rather than useless graphic images that just waste time and bandwidth. Many sites for great products focus on content and not prettiness (apache and python to name two), and I hope it stays that way. Too many Web developers have lost touch with what is important (content) and have followed the poisoned path of making great "looking" sites instead. This is not to say that a site can't be made attactive, improve on navigation, clarity, and ease of use. However, I find myself wasting a lot of time on the Web waiting for sexy when what I want is information. --- Ron -----Original Message----- [with many snips] From: zope-admin@zope.org [mailto:zope-admin@zope.org]On Behalf Of alan runyan Sent: Friday, December 17, 1999 2:08 AM To: zope@zope.org Subject: [Zope] alot of general dc, zope, public relations questions anyway: I've shown some developers Zope and most can not get past the web site --zope.org attention-- (zope.org - i personally like it.. although its getting old, visiting it everyday 8) design (mix of fonts, unsexy graphics, poor navigation -> please make Browse the DTML Reference online here. abit more obvious (documentation page) this should be accented w/ a graphic or much more pronounced text like the .tgz) --/zope.org attention-- and the digicool.com web site only speaks of ZEO, and some open source pdfs, ang lots of press releases. NOTE: I'm sure you would rather spend time developing Zope than the website advertising zope.. but it needs to happen for marketing purposes. not HUGE, simple and slick - roxen has a very nice web site. Its just Zope doesnt seem like a commercial viability. does anyone else get that impression? please make zope sexy so my friends and the world will like it. Amos definetly sex'd up Zope w/ his article at xml.com