Beautiful is better than ugly

Anthony Fisher lists at
Wed Apr 22 15:22:31 BST 2009

L?on Brocard <acme at> wrote:

> Alias ranted:
> Which Perl website do you think looks the worst? Which has the worst navigation?
> We managed to redesign Is it time to do another?

Some aspects of good/bad design are fairly universal, but I think it's
worth asking "what are we trying to achieve" here. Who is the audience
and what is our message?

Also, since we're playing catch-up on this front, there really isn't
any harm in derivative design.


We have two main audiences: corporate types and geeks. It might be
helpful to aim particular sites primarily at one or the other. Eg at corporates, CPAN and .pm sites at techies.

To corporate types we want to say:

    Perl is alive (Brian Blessed voice optional)
    Perl is suitable for major/"enterprise" applications
    Lots of other people use Perl, and it's widely supported
    No, really, it's alive

For this, perhaps we should stea^H^H^H^H look to the websites of the
likes of Sun, IBM and Oracle? We probably want lots of news and, in
particular, case studies, indicators of different companies/orgs using
it, stuff about integration.

To geeks we want to say:

    Perl is alive
    Look at the shiny cool features and stuff!

It may be worth looking at the main sites for Python and Ruby, but I
don't know if their design is actually any good. Apple and "cool" geek
sites might be good inspiration. It's probably worth emphasising the
frameworks and so on; some people seem to think that because Perl
doesn't have *one*, say, templating system, that it doesn't have any.


To contact me directly please apply s/lists/aef/ to my address.

More information about the mailing list