Aloha, ...
I start to understand:
You want to have a narrow, a focused site because you fear that a bigger one cannot be managed.
In such a case, I would say: start with the small solution and maybe get bigger later.
This is a basic principle of design that works (as opposed to design that fails to work). Start small and work the edges outwards. The "work edges outwards" that works is often modular in nature (perhaps a.k.a. 'micro-sites'). That doesn't mean it can't look-and-feel like "one big site as access point." Biting off more than one (person, organization, whatever) can chew usually results in choking... So I actually see a lot of agreement in what may appear to be argument. Also: I agree that despite the wonders of zope, the zope.org site is not as stunning a place to refer people to as it could be. For the most general public face of the site, I support the idea of a clear and simple "brochure-like" approach. A couple major open source project/product sites that I am excited about referring people to: http://rubyonrails.org http://www.mozilla.com ...and to some extent http://www.openoffice.org ...although IMO the OO site is not quite as clear and well-designed as the other two...better than zope.org though. Also bearing in mind that the Ruby On Rails site is for a development platform while Mozilla and OO are end-user app sites - somwhat different audiences. cheers, John S. -- John Schinnerer - MA, Whole Systems Design ------------------------------------------ - Eco-Living - Whole Systems Design Services People - Place - Learning - Integration john@eco-living.net http://eco-living.net