KCLUG

kclug@kclug.org

3239 discussions

Proposed Web site redesign (beta)
by Steven Hildreth 09 Nov '04

09 Nov '04

Hi, I am working on updating the KcLUG website to be a dynamic content site via the XOOPS engine, other than a few graphics needed here and there I think it is ready for beta-viewing by the group. you can access the beta-site here; http://www.kclug.org/~shildreth/ I have created a Forum topic here (read only for public, to post a comment create a login; http://www.kclug.org/~shildreth/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=1&foru… Not to sound ungrateful for any comments/suggestions, but lets try to make them constructive and productive to making a modern, updated, technical site for our group. I know you you Linux guys (myself included) tend to argue over semantics versus content ;) Thanks! Steven (Tallen)

9 13

RE: Proposed Web site redesign (beta)
by Dustin Decker 09 Nov '04

09 Nov '04

> -----Original Message----- > From: kclug-bounces(a)kclug.org [mailto:kclug-bounces@kclug.org] On Behalf > Of Steven Hildreth > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:52 AM > To: Jason Clinton > Cc: kclug(a)kclug.org > Subject: Re: Proposed Web site redesign (beta) [snip] > My position is that if it renders well in Mozilla, Firefox, Konqueror > and IE that is ensuring a wide enough target audience. Sure the Links > guys will get pissed, but realistically I think we should ensure > operability with the 99% audience - not degrade the overall visual > impression for all to appease the 1% I have to agree with Steven on this to some extent. I'm not a purist anyway. I too have worked with CMS systems, mostly just PostNuke and Mambo. I know that PostNuke has a module available which produces a "hand held friendly" representation of the website. (Compare http://www.1on1security.com/ with http://www.1on1security.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=AvantGo&file=index for example.) Perhaps we can strike a balance between the two... if the 1% is "intelligent" enough to use Links/Lynx, then they can find the appropriate module - we can even place the link where such browsers readily locate it, etc. Thoughts? [Grrr.. I really wish hitting "reply" would respond to the list, rather than the poster - but at least now I am not so thoughtless as to not consider the blind - made me at least mindful of them as I re-post this to the list.] [/me tosses a 5 gallon can of gas on the fire, and giggles from the sidelines.] Dustin

3 3

RE: Proposed Web site redesign (beta)
by Brian Densmore 09 Nov '04

09 Nov '04

I just checked out the first page anyway in Lynx and it displays just fine, although it sets a cookie. I don't know if it is blind-friendly or not, and am not sure even how to determine if it is or is not. It would be nice to be able to make the site available to the widest audience. [same disclaimer as Tom] > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Bruno > > I like this idea, have a <for blind> link at the top in the > first few > lines of the page, that is w3c compliant. Then we can write > something > for the blind pages that pulls the articles out of the sql database. > Still dynamic, same content just different look (not violating > seperate-content principle or whatever jason was talking > about), and we > still get the nice look. Sure it'll take a little work, > but... what do > we do.. sit around and argue in the IRC channel anyway. > > Don't take that as me volunteering to do it. I don't have > a clue. If > it came to it though, i could probably learn. >

2 1

RE: Proposed Web site redesign (beta)
by Tom Bruno 09 Nov '04

09 Nov '04

I just downloaded one of the major screen reading browsers from IBM. Seems that it reads tables just fine. Tells you which side of the table you are on and all kinds of stuff, really cool. Handles the site very well. Home Page Reader 3.02 And lynx displays the page fine i'd say. As long as all the table columbs have headers so the blind can know what section of content they are in.

1 0

Re: Proposed Web site redesign (beta)
by Brian Kelsay 09 Nov '04

09 Nov '04

This was my point, but I forgot to write the stuff about the dynamic content. I was thinking it, didn't you get the TCP/ESP message? My wireless connection must be getting flaky. I'd like to add that if it were not for the new speedy, local server, we could not have such a near real time conversation as this. I'm loving it. I'm glad all those pieces came together. Brian Kelsay >>> Tom Bruno <> 11/09/04 12:32PM >>> I like this idea, have a <for blind> link at the top in the first few lines of the page, that is W3C compliant. Then we can write something for the blind pages that pulls the articles out of the SQL database. Still dynamic, same content just different look (not violating separate-content principle or whatever Jason was talking about), and we still get the nice look. Sure it'll take a little work, but... what do we do.. sit around and argue in the IRC channel anyway. Don't take that as me volunteering to do it. I don't have a clue. If it came to it though, I could probably learn.

1 0

RE: Proposed Web site redesign (beta)
by Brian Densmore 09 Nov '04

09 Nov '04

> -----Original Message----- > From: Steven Hildreth > > Is w3/wia and w3/HTML compliance a requirement of the replacement > offering? Never was mentioned to me when I offered to create a new > modern, dynamic replacement site. > > No CMS stock package I have found (I have tested several for a > previous project including; PhpNuke, PostNuke, Slashcode, eGroupare, > Mambo, and XOOPS) generates either w3/wia or w3/HTML compliant code. > > My position is that if it renders well in Mozilla, Firefox, Konqueror > and IE that is ensuring a wide enough target audience. Sure the Links > guys will get pissed, but realistically I think we should ensure > operability with the 99% audience - not degrade the overall visual > impression for all to appease the 1% > > Other opinions? Am I understanding this correctly, does Links not support displaying tables? If this is the case then I say the authors of Links are the ones that need to worry about compliance. That said, I do believe that the tables should be free of stylesheets and whatnot. As an example, take my website. I use stylesheets and stuff (although I do have some troubleshooting to do with IE) and the content is dynamically created. I use tables and my website displays quite nicely <pat on the back> in Lynx (IMHO). It really comes down to separating advanced functionality from global functionality. Nearly all useable websites use tables. Any browser that doesn't should be discarded for something more web friendly. All that said, I do feel that any kclug site should display well in a non-graphical browser. It think it would be worth testing the website in Lynx to make sure it displays decently, but I certainly would make that a requirement. I do sometimes use Lynx, like from firewall boxes and other boxes with no X. So the site should at least work in text mode. besides it's just good design to separate the gui from the data and all CMS worth their weight would support that approach. Also w3/wia doesn't say don't use tables for layout, but not to use tables for layout if it would be confusing and bad ways (paraphrasing). $0.02, Brian D.

1 0

Re: Proposed Web site redesign (beta)
by Brian Kelsay 09 Nov '04

09 Nov '04

We have had blind Linux users in the past attend meetings. They use Lynx as far as I know and redirect to text to speech or to some sort of Braille reader device that uses a serial port. never seen one up close, but have read about them. We would need the static pages still and have them linked from a link that occurs at the top of the page so they could get to it easily. We have similar users here at the USDA and so all pages must be run thru Bobby and a couple of other validators. Somehow they make the stuff work, but we don't have a user forum as far as I know. A best practice that you may want to use, would be to have a static from page with a link to the forum portion or something similar. Kind of the reverse of having a Flash intro page, if you get my meaning. Brian Kelsay >>> Steven Hildreth <> 11/09/04 11:52AM >>> Is w3/wia and w3/HTML compliance a requirement of the replacement offering? Never was mentioned to me when I offered to create a new modern, dynamic replacement site. No CMS stock package I have found (I have tested several for a previous project including; PhpNuke, PostNuke, Slashcode, eGroupware, Mambo, and XOOPS) generates either w3/wia or w3/HTML compliant code. My position is that if it renders well in Mozilla, Firefox, Konqueror and IE that is ensuring a wide enough target audience. Sure the Links guys will get pissed, but realistically I think we should ensure operability with the 99% audience - not degrade the overall visual impression for all to appease the 1% Other opinions? Regards, Steven (Tallen)

2 1

Re: Network cloning of raid array
by Brian Kelsay 09 Nov '04

09 Nov '04

Not sure if it will work in a RAID setup, but the Linux world has partimage, to image partitions. I still haven't had a chance to test it, but it is supposed to work with NFS shares, partition to partition and disk to disk. There may be something in the RaidTools package that will do what you want. Brian Kelsay >>> Brad <> 11/09/04 10:25AM >>> I have 2 raid 5 systems that I need to install to be identical. I was hoping someone might know of a way to install and configure the first, and then clone it over the network. Yes, I could use ghost, but I was hoping there was a nice way of doing it with Linux utilities. I read about using a rescue disk and a floppy with netcat to use dd, but I am not sure that is the easiest way. Suggestions?

3 3

Re: Network cloning of raid array
by Brian Kelsay 09 Nov '04

09 Nov '04

Just thought of something else. You could use something like Kickstart to create a sort of install script that makes multiple exact installs possible. http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/lpt/a/5077 http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/lpt/a/5296 Brian Kelsay

2 1

RE: Network cloning of raid array
by Brian Densmore 09 Nov '04

09 Nov '04

He would then first have to configure the drives for RAID 5 and duplicate all the configuration of the disks. I think he is wanting to snapshot the system. Although I wasn't aware that ghost could do that to a RAID system. Not sure if this would help, but I wrote a program years ago that would read a disk from the physical beginning to the physical end and write it to another disk. If you want I could dig up the source code. It might be assembler and/or C and was written for a DOS system. But doesn't dd do just this, read the physical disk? Why would he need to anything except dd the drives? > -----Original Message----- > From: djgoku > Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:26 AM > To: kclug(a)kclug.org > Subject: Re: Network cloning of raid array > > > Could you just tar up the system boot to a live cd mount / and untar? >

2 1

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

KCLUG