Our website redesign work is shaping up nicely and although due to COVID-19 we’ve had a few understandable delays, we are nearing an important milestone as navigation design is about to begin:

Studio 24 have just published a new Information Architecture –and a summary of the content design work that informs it– as well as wireframes that illustrate the content hierarchy of key pages.

Note: the wires, which currently are “mobile first” (because starting from mobile ensures the best experience for the most limiting view), are quite likely to evolve and change a bit during the upcoming design phase.

The CMS choice is another important aspect of the project. Since the publication of Studio 24’s notes on CMS platform selection a month ago, slow progress was made: accessibility testing, conversations and one frustrating observation: many tools don’t really seem to consider accessibility from the onset which may have to make for difficult decisions around how we ensure editing tools are accessible for all users.

To put this update in context, the upcoming phases in this project are design & production, beta site setup, QA testing and launch.

2 thoughts on “W3C Website redesign: new Information Architecture, wireframes”

1. Federico says:
   September 22, 2020 at 7:17 am

   What does “commercial license” mean on https://w3c.studio24.net/docs/w3c-cms-selection-process-update/ ?

   Please avoid such confusing terminology. It would be easier to say “unfree license” or “proprietary license” or “private license”. Free licenses are commercial; non-commercial licenses are unfree; and free software can be sold, so you can have commercial entities and a commercial model for completely free software.
   https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.en.html

   Reply
   1. Marie Manandise says:
      September 22, 2020 at 9:34 am

      Hi Federico,

      Thank you for pointing that out and apologies for using these terms too lightly.

      What I meant by “commercial license” is that the user needs to pay for a license key in order to benefit from extended features and support. They are supported mainly by a business (as opposed to a community)

      To be honest, I find it difficult to describe the licensing models of both Statamic and Craft.

      The code of both CMSes is “freely” available on Github and as such can be forked, shared, re-distributed. Can we therefore qualify it of open-source?

      A limited version of the software can be used for free (single admin account). On the other hand, full features can only be accessed and used after purchasing a license key. Does this make them “unfree”?

      In your opinion, what would be the best way to describe them?

      I’ll look into this myself as well and amend the wording of the report accordingly.

      Thank you.

      Reply