[wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

Destry · 2004-12-21 18:03:21

Topic:
REVISED: Proposal for a Textpattern site Showcase…a no-BS, cream-of-the-crop showcasing of Web sites created using Textpattern.

Motivation:
REVISED: Chapter 3 in <a href=“http://textpattern.net/wiki/”>TextBook</a>, the developing Textpattern user manual, will be addressing basic TxP designs (Weblogs, commercial sites, photo galleries, etc.) to get new users on the right track. A nice addition to those chapter sections would be to model the basic plans on a wonderful and elegant example that exists. A “model” suggest taking a nice site candidate, cracking open the structure, revealing the code, describing how the creator built the site…one step at a time, and supporting the write-up with any relevent images (screenshots). A showcase might be an ideal way of selecting those sites. Using such examples is not unlike the approach other design books/manuals take (e.g., Eric Meyer’s books on using CSS are written this way), and it’s an effective method at helping people learn.

Benefits:
REVISED: In addition to having a praiseworthy nod in their favor for a well crafted site, potential candidates might also earn the distinguished honor of having their nice work discussed and used as a model in a relevent TextBook section that will end up helping untold thousands of new TxP users. It could be yours, wouldn’t that be cool? And, of course, you can die knowing that your TxP creation is all that. So in summary: it supports the TextBook initiative, thereby helping new TxP users globally, it’s fun for the TxP community, and it could be a superb feather in the cap for you. Winners all around!

Basic Notions:
<ul><li>REVISED: There would be a showcase category for each type of site model (e.g., Weblog, photo gallery, non- e-commerce business, design portfolio…other? different?). It might be best to keep categories to a maximum of four so the candidate pool is not too diluted and the whole effort is not out of hand. Model categories here will be the focus in Chapter 5 of the TextBook.)</li>
<li>REVISED: A set of heuristics might logically be created for each category by which the community might sensibly compare potential candidates. Heuristics would likely be tailored to the specific nature of each category, but might cover such things as elegance of structure, simplicity of code, simplicity of CSS, browser support, accessibility, usability, etc. For the purposes of the TextBook appearance is the least important, but for the purposes of the showcase in general, appearance would seemingly be a relevent heuristic.</li>
<li>Candidates for a showcase would be based on the feedback of the TxP community, and might require the following conditions:</li>
<ol><li>Candidate sites must have already been presented in the <a href=“http://forum.textpattern.com/viewforum.php?id=6”>Let’s See Yours, Then</a> forum.</li>
<li>REVISED: Candidates should have a reasonable number of community votes (logically based on the heuristics) to be considered as a showcase candidate.</li>
<li>REVISED: To keep the forum Let’s See Yours, Then dinstinct/separate from the dialogue in this thread, all votes for a candidate should be made in this thread, or in another determined location. Votes cast anywhere else would not be considered valid.</li>
<li>When a first vote is cast for a new candidate, the link to their review thread in the Let’s See Yours, Then forum should also be provided.</li></ol>
<li>REVISED: As candidates are realized, they are added to a relevent showcase page (yet to be determined) for all to ogle and keep honest.</li>
<li>REVISED: The ascending order of showcase entries (from best to damn good) would be based on the number of unique votes for a particular candidate, AND on the professional feedback from the TxP community. (Again, votes should be based on the logical metrics of the heuristics, not because a site simply uses a nice shade of blue or a pretty photoshop image.)</li>
<li>REVISED: For the purposes of the TextBook only, section write-ups will be based on sites revealed in the Let’s See Yours, Then forum by the end of December 2004. For the purposes of showcases into the future, candidates will be considered for the year they were first revealed (e.g., 2005, 2006, etc.); in other words, yearly showcases might be the norm.</li>
<li>REVISED: For the purposes of the TextBook, owners of the sites holding the top spot in a showcase category would be given the priority option of having their work discussed and used in the TextBook write-up. If they passed on this offer, then the next candidate in line would have the option, and so forth. Whomever the TextBook candidates are, they would understand two things:</li>
<ol><li>They would need to open up their basic structure, layout, and code/markup/CSS techniques for all to see, since it’s necessary for presenting the relevent model in the TextBook chapter.</li>
<li>They would need to assist with writing the relevent TextBook sections, or assist somebody else with the details who might write the chapter section for them. (This isn’t expected to happen to the expense of your real money-making endeavors — that could be worked around — but it is important and would need done if your noteworthy work was to be used in the TextBook, where it will help thousands of new recruits to the TxP wonder.)</li></ol>
<li>REVISED: When TextBook entries have been realized, communication efforts can be made to officially begin the development of the relevant write-up in the TextBook chapter.</li>
<li>Creators of multiple sites can contribute each work, but each site must represent only one category. (I.e., if a site is both a Weblog and a photo gallery, it can only be evaluated for one category or the other, not both.).</li></ul>

Getting Started:
REVISED: It wouldn’t take much to get started. Feedback to anything proposed here would be the first step; working out any vague ideas, missing notions, better suggestions, etc.. Also, the heuristics might get a little thought and feedback so that all the great sites can be evaluated evenly, fairly, and logically. (Note: although we want to keep this relatively simple so it might take flight easier, we DO want showcase sites to be representative of quality work, so thoughts towards the heuristics are important.) Then, let the games begin.

To kick things off, I think there’s no argument to automatically add one candidate into a category right from the start (how it fares in the category, we shall see); simply because of the incredible amount of praise the site has already generated in the Let’s See Yours, Then forum. That would be Jon Hicks’ own site, <a href=“http://www.hicksdesign.co.uk/”>Hicks Design</a>. (See his <a href=“http://forum.textpattern.com/viewtopic.php?id=2248”>site review thread</a>.)

Important note to owners of site candidates: If you would rather not have anything to do with this, simply say so and your site will not be added to any category, no matter how many praises it might get. (But come-onnnnnnn, you want it. You know you want it.)

Last edited by Destry (2005-01-11 13:56:36)

reid · 2004-12-21 18:25:23

I’m going to give my unique opinion that is likely shared by no one else, and can therefore be easily ignored. But for what it’s worth…

I love the idea of a showcase. It would be very helpful for anyone considering using Textpattern to see what people are doing with it at various kinds of sites. Some categories would be needed, just for the sake of organization, but I would keep them few in number, and loose in definition.

Where I have a problem is with the “Top 10” aspect of it. I think once you make it a competition, with votes, and changing status, you create an environment for hurt feelings, and even cheating. I know, the Textpattern community has never been like that.

It’s never had the opportunity.

While there would need to be some mechanism to determine what sites get added, and to what category, I’d prefer to see an end result along the lines of CSS Beauty . Each addition would get prominent attention up front when it is added, and would then be in the category archive for anyone who wanted to see sites of that type.

No judgment other than “worthy of inclusion.” No fluctuating grade, just a category. If it’s to be a resource, that’s all that’s needed.

And when you talk about “freezing” certain categories when they reach an arbitrary number, I don’t know how you can do that, when there are new Textpattern sites being created every day. What if your cut off came before someone like Jon Hicks decided to jump into the pool? (Later: Oops, I now see you meant only freezing it for the Textbook project)

Last edited by reid (2004-12-21 18:28:59)

Destry · 2004-12-21 18:50:18

Hi Reid…excellent points all. Just the kind of thing something like this needs if it’s to work at all.

First, I should make it clear (to everyone) that my feelings will not be hurt if this doesn’t fly. I’m just testing the water with the idea. I certainly think the motive is valid and nobody should find it unsavory.

As far as judging issues go, I’m open. I tried to keep the process as close to the way things are already in the boards…how people use the Let’s See Yours, Then forum.

The freezing issue is a good point. I tried to be clear about why that was necessary; it’s only meant for purposes of getting the TextBook content written (in this lifetime). The Showcase activity itself can go on forever. I’m certainly open to a particular timeframe, but we would need to be realistic about a “deadline” for submissions.

Last edited by Destry (2004-12-21 18:50:47)

Hans · 2004-12-21 18:53:45

I agree with Reid; as long as there’s only a gallery (and categories to orgainze the sites by type), everything should be just fine. Grades, ratings, detailed reviews, and separate galleries (according to “quality”) are going to spoil the atmosphere, eventually.

How about expanding that Top 10 to the Top 15? To me, “Top 10” sounds like “the snobby elite who don’t care about you,” but the “Top 15” sounds like “the best of the best; even you can get in.”

Just my two cents.

Last edited by NULL (1970-01-01 00:00:00)

michaelkpate · 2004-12-21 21:29:27

I think it is better not to have a specific number. It could be more like the Movable Type Spotlight Sites or Matt’s Well Designed WordPress Sites.

Ten may be plenty for now, but someday it hopefully will not be.

Last edited by michaelkpate (2004-12-21 21:33:08)

Remillard · 2004-12-21 22:04:46

I did something similar at the end of my last tutorial. I didn’t make it into anything special though. Just found some sites I liked and mentioned them.

I guess I wouldn’t say Top 10.. but as suggested, perhaps a highlighted site of the week/day/month, etc would be nifty.

Last edited by NULL (1970-01-01 00:00:00)

Daragh · 2004-12-21 22:16:59

Can we do an awards show? The TXPies?

What I liked about the MT profile thing is that they tended to mention sites that were interesting not just because they were good-looking, but because of how they were using MT. You could leaf through the archives and discover new ways of doing things, new things you didn’t realize you could do, that sort of thing. To me, that’s a more interesting angle for a gallery thing like this than a design-popularity contest – which ultimately has little to do with TXP. I myself was drawn to TXP because I could use it to do things MT and WP couldn’t; I bet a list of sites using TXP in interesting ways would show an entirely different kind of site from those running different software.

And yeah, ranking is bad, unless it’s a yearly thing maybe.

Last edited by NULL (1970-01-01 00:00:00)

Boogenstein · 2004-12-21 23:42:51

I am also against the Top Ten part of it for the same reasons as mentioned above.

A showcase showing the wide variety of possibilities would be a good thing to go with the Manual. It should demonstrate the spectrum of TXP sites, from the simple, clean and basic, through to the outrageous and bizarre. Somewhere inbetween could be the static/non-blog sites, galleries etc. Each could be used as examples and be linked to the appropriate section of the Manual though how a person could look at a site and fugure out how it had been created in TXP is beyond me!

Maybe you could appeal for people who had used certain techniques to show their code and be used as examples? For instance, say the manual is dealing with adding PHP includes, you could ask the forum for examples and then pick a couple whose code was clearest for the sake of newcomers reading up on it, etc, etc.

Last edited by NULL (1970-01-01 00:00:00)

Destry · 2004-12-22 11:26:27

Based on your feedback so far, it seems like there’s some interest with this initiative as long as there are a few changes, which I’ll address at bottom, but first let me reiterate a few points so this initiative doesn’t get all construed in the dialogue:

<ol><li>The real motivation behind this is — the TextBook. It’s not a design contest, and nobody is getting awards. I’m proposing a logical and fair methodology for the selection process of what existing Web sites might be used in the TextBook writeups for a few common, but well-done, structures. That’s it. Nothing more should be read into it at this point.</li>
<li>Nowhere did I suggest that sites should be selected for a showcase “just because they were good-looking.” That is absolutely the opposite of what I am suggesting, and contrary to the real motivation.</li>
<li>With respect to #1, I’m looking for a few representative sites (not a “spectrum”) that show exceptional and simple use of everthing TxP has to offer (structure, code, markup, CSS, etc….a pretty face doesn’t hurt, and certainly should be a metric, but it’s not the important focus) for instructional purposes only in the TextBook. For the TextBook write-ups, selected sites will be cracked open, the structure will be revealed, and the development techniques will be described; that’s the whole point here.</li></ol>

What direction the showcase goes beyond the purposes of TextBook remains to be seen, and I think that’s what most of the feedback here is really focusing on, and that’s great, but the long-term of a showcase is not the main focus at the moment. So I guess what we need to consider when thinking about all this is how to structure the showcase initiative (if it should happen) in such a way as to serve the objectives of the TextBook, but also to shape a permanent showcase in general for the enjoyment of the TxP community long into the future. Make sense?</li></ol>

Having said that, let me see if I can summarize your suggestions so far, make changes in the head post, and then we’ll see how it sits:

<ul><li>The most notable thing that seemingly should be changed, and wisely so to nix the “contest” implication, is the concept of “the Top 10.” Suggestions seem to indicate no specific number should be emphasized, or if so, at least a larger number. It certainly makes no difference to me either way, but let’s go with no number. Instead, we’ll simply rely on the professional developer/designer feedback of the community to nominate a site for inclusion into select category lists somewhere. Come to think of it, this change would also be useful because some categories might have more candidates than others (e.g. Weblogs vs. photo galleries), and as michaelkpate pointed out, 10 entries might not be enough.</li>

<li>The next issue seems to be one of the heuristic measurements themselves…it seems you don’t like them. That’s fine with me too. I’ll simply trust (and hope) that the community has the sense to select candidates for a showcase who really deserve to be there, and for a variety of good reasons (not just looks).

[But I do have to give my own opinion here, not that it matters for the sake of the showcase, but for the sake of the TextBook (remember point #1 above). Personally, I think not having any metrics by which to evaluate a site is not only lazy, but it’s extremely careless as well. I don’t see how you could possibly evalute anything (let alone a Web site) — evenly and fairly — without them. As a modest example: If you have a decent set of metrics in place by which to evaluate sites, then you prevent the erroneous selection of sites simply “because they were good-looking,” as Daragh commented. Metrics provide a guide by which other important aspects of a site are looked at too (concept, theme, structure, code, markup, accessibility, etc. etc. etc.).]</li>

<li>I like the notion Remillard proffered, about time frames. This would also address Reid’s notion about a cut-off point for selecting entries for the TextBook chapter. Here’s what I’m thinking…maybe for the long-term scope, the showcase will have a two-fold structure: yearly and type (type being Weblog, business site, etc.). I like the idea of yearly because it can take a while to get a top-knotch site put together for some people, and yearly seems like a reasonable and clear way to section the showcase. Type is self-explanatory.

Then all sites revealed in the Lets See Yours, Then forum through the end of this month (Dec 2004) will be considered for both the purposes of the TextBook, and for the entries in the first launch of the showcase in general…the Showcase Launch! (or some other such fanfare label). Then future showcase candidates are considered for the year they were first presented for review (2005, 2006, etc.). Seem reasonable? (Though again I think you’re going to need evaluation metrics, especially if you don’t want a set number of entries, but that’s up to you.) There will probably be a need for a clause that addresses site redesigns, like a redesign can only be considered in a year after the original design was revealed, or whatever.</li></ul>

OK, I think that addresses the issues brought up, whether or not it remedies anything, that’s another view. Mainly, I’m more than willing to help shape this in whatever way the community thinks is best. My only objective, being I’m a proponent of the TextBook, is that we have some well-crafted sites used in TextBook for helping new users create basic sites using TxP. If this showcase idea doesn’t take root, I think it would be a shame, because it’s a nice, fair, community-involved way of making the TextBook selections, while at the same time offers some value/entertainment to the community at large.

Last edited by Destry (2004-12-22 14:47:10)

Destry · 2004-12-22 12:57:09

Quick note…I revised the head post to reflect discussion to this point. I left the ideas of “heuristics” until we get a little more clarity on the issue. (I’m having trouble with that part, maybe someone can counter my argument for having them with something more than just “hurt feelings”?) Keep the good feedback coming. ;)

Last edited by NULL (1970-01-01 00:00:00)

Destry · 2004-12-31 11:18:03

Alexandra’s <a href=“http://forum.textpattern.com/viewtopic.php?id=5486”>Which TXP site you regard to be well designed?</a> thread is pretty good timing, and seemingly appropriate to what I’m after here. She has indirectly established the “showcase” (though not categorically by type, but by country of origin) that might help with looking at potential candidates for the TextBook chapter write-ups.

So, contribute your “notable” site ideas to her thread, and we’ll see where this leads for TextBook selections later.

Last edited by Destry (2004-12-31 11:19:35)

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#1 2004-12-21 18:03:21

[wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

#2 2004-12-21 18:25:23

Re: [wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

#3 2004-12-21 18:50:18

Re: [wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

#4 2004-12-21 18:53:45

Re: [wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

#5 2004-12-21 21:29:27

Re: [wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

#6 2004-12-21 22:04:46

Re: [wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

#7 2004-12-21 22:16:59

Re: [wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

#8 2004-12-21 23:42:51

Re: [wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

#9 2004-12-22 11:26:27

Re: [wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

#10 2004-12-22 12:57:09

Re: [wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

#11 2004-12-31 11:18:03

Re: [wiki] Textpattern Showcase Proposal

Board footer