Present: Steve Blodgett, Steve Butts, Jim Evans, Joe Gregg, Steve Hirby, Joey Lawrance, Robert Lowe, Nancy Truesdell
The existing site redesign project plan was reviewed. It was agreed that, given the slippage related to card sorting, the start date of all remaining tasks should be delayed by two weeks.
Steve Hirby agreed to provide logistical support for organizing the paper prototyping sessions; he will rely on the assistance of the steering committee to identify the appropriate review groups and members of the those groups.
There was extensive discussion of when and how best to involve stakeholders in the redesign process. It was noted that the role of the various stakeholder groups is not to server as a “focus group” but, rather, to concur with the redesign, endorse it, and support it. The faculty enrollment committee was identified as a group whose members are interested in the redesign project.
We agreed to hold a redesign “open house” when Bambi or another NetCasters rep is next on campus (probably in conjunction with the paper prototyping). All identified stakeholders would be invited, although the session would not be open to the general campus public. We would ask the NetCasters representative to describe the redesign process so far, present the views and prototypes, and solicit feedback. It was hoped that the results of this session would provide additional information complementing the formal paper prototype review sessions.
We agreed to lengthen the time allotted in the project plan for securing final site map approval (presently set at one week).
We discussed several other tasks to be added to the project plan.
Steve Butts will communicate with Bambi about the open house idea and will revise the project plan to reflect the timing changes and the additional tasks.
NetCasters’ proposed list of tasks to be performed in conjunction with the prototype review was discussed. Several items were removed; several other were added. Steve Butts will create a consolidated list and send it to NetCasters.
Steve Blodgett reported on discussions he, Pete Gilbert, and Marsha Tuchscherer have been having. One focus of those discussion has to do with whether all images used on the site should be stored in a central location, or whether they could be placed in the same directories as general documents. The subcommittee believes that all images should be in separate directories, though it is not clear whether there should be a single directory for the entire site or, instead, multiple image directories in the various branches of the site tree. Steve also shared his idea of creating an image bank which content providers could browse in order to locate images. Those images could then be copied to the appropriate Web directories as needed.
Steve Hirby reported on OTG XtenderSolutions, an image and document management application for which Lawrence owns a license because of the Banner project. There was skepticism about the fit of this product with our Web image management needs.
It was agreed to ask NetCasters for image management recommendations.
We agreed that the “standard” Web site view would consist of the following top-level categories (present here not necessarily in order):
• About Lawrence
• Administration
• Academic Programs
• Admissions
• News, Sports, and Events
• Campus Life
• The Conservatory
• The Library
• Special Programs
There was inconclusive discussion about the several constituent views; Steve Butts agreed to summarize the discussion and share a proposed report with the committee before sending it to NetCasters early in the week of April 8.
Respectfully Submitted,
Steve Hirby
Secretary pro tempore