OSArch website design

J by JQL on 8 Sep 2020, edited 8 Sep 2020 # +3 votes

Hi all,

I'm a bit critic of the current form of communication of the purpose of OSArch. From the point of view of someone arriving just now, there's no clear purpose stated for what is OSArch and what is the purpose of the community behind it.

I came here first searching for info on BlenderBIM, because I hadn't find much until then. Actually it was google that thrown me in while I was exploring BlenderBIM. I started by loosing interest in OSArch as I thought it was a forum for discussing open source software for architecture in general and it was not specific of BlenderBIM, but then I didn't see any other place to discuss blenderBIM and seen lot of posts about it so thought it was mainly for BlenderBIM and people that wanted to get involved with it. I got into the meeting thinking I would discuss about BlenderBIM and finally I understood that I was almost right at first impression.

The first impression was in end August, and I'm understanding what's happening only almost 15 days later. It's probably a problem in me, but I guess more people will have it.

The way I see it now, the purpose of OSArch is not so much to find FOSS alternatives to standard Architectural workflows, it rather is finding the right alternatives and the developers/users that want to bridge together to create a functional workflow. So, aggregating those alternatives into the same umbrella which is OSArch, means that they will all remain as independent as they wish but will contribute to be a part of a chain where they work seamlessly together.

I hope I got it right this time.

If this is so, this has to be stated from the start in the frontpage and also in the forum.

Another issue is separating what software is already under the umbrella of OSArch and is trying to build bridges with each other from softwre is not under the umbrella but is interesting for the objectives of OSArch or OSArch relies on it:

I'll assume BlenderBIM is under OSArch;
I understood Archipack is feeding geometry that BlenderBIM reads directly and so it's working under the OSArch umbrella too.
Is FreeCAD?
Is Topologic?
Who else is?

Being under the umbrella doesn't mean software has to follow what OSArch determines, it just means that a specific software is trying to work well within the objectives of OSArch and, therefore, bridging well together with software already under the umbrella.

Blender is clearly not under OSArch, but it's essential for OSArch purposes. Blender Foundation could eventually at some point, support OSArch, or develop work to make better bridges with OSArch software, if OSArch needs it and pledges for it.

Is FreeCAD like Blender or is it part of OSArch already or is it more willing to be a part of OSArch at this point?

Then there is huge a repository of FOSS AEC software and it is very interesting to have in the site and keep it updated.

However most of that software is not related to OSArch at any level, or even aware of what OSArch is and what are the objectives. Software that is not activelly working to build bridges, or sofware which is not part of any workflow, should remain at the repository because otherwise it will only bring confusion up. If a user finds a software and demonstrates it's usefulness for any OSArch workflow, then it should be mentioned specifically even if that software isn't collaborating.

From this repository we might also identify specific software that is particularly interesting for OSArch's objectives, and then it's OSArch that should reach out to them expose them a clear objective and ask them to join and work for that objective, where they would then agree to be a part of OSArch. If they are not interested, either they are useful as they are and need not change, and they should be mentioned in the OSArch workflow (like libreoffice and others) or it is OSArch that might need to find alternative software to fill the gap, or build the bridges by themselves.

There is also the matter of proprietary software and how OSArch software bridges with it. There is some random mention of Revit in the wiki but it's not clear from the start why is it mentioned. If the idea is to start using some of OSArch software to fill the gaps of other software, then there should be a dedicated section just for that. As users from the community show examples of how they use OSArch software to complement they're usual tools, the wiki should show those too.

So, for me, the organization of the site should be clearer and more related to OSARch's objectives and I would suggest something like this:

1 - What is OSArch?

1.1 - Find FOSS that can be connected for a full workflow or for several smaller workflows for all sectors and stages of the AEC Industry;

1.2 - Develop FOSS that can replace proprietary software for all stages of the workflow or for more workflows for specific tasks;

1.3 - Gather a community of users and developers around the objective of perfecting OSArch software and workflows.

2 - Examples of what has been made using OSArch software and workflows.

2.1 - Examples of what can be done using specific software - be clear about potential and limitations;

2.2 - Examples of what can be done using a specific workflow - example: using this and this people can create a IFC MEP model to use with Trimble Connect.

2.3 - Examples of projects fully developed using OSARch software (this will take time and it's too ambitious for now, but it's nice to state that there are no examples yet, or that it's not yet possible, though that is the objective).

3 - What software is part of the OSArch workflow?

3.1 - BlenderBIM - how to use and what's it's roll on the workflow;

3.2 - Archipack - how to use and what's it's roll on the workflow;

3.3 - (sorry for my lack of knowledge)...

4 - Other FOSS software for AEC not related to OSArch:

4.1 - Repository

5 - Workflows

5.1 - Description of workflows to achieve specific tasks using exclusively FOSS;

5.2 - Description of workflows to develop a full project using FOSS.

5.3 - Integrating OSArch software with proprietary Software. How to use OSARch software with:

5.3.1 - Revit;

5.3.2 - Archicad;

5.3.3 - Rhino;

5.3.4 - Sketchup;

5.3.5 - AutoCAD;

5.3.6 - (...)

6 - OSArch Community:

6.1 - Use, test and give feedback on the OSARch software;

6.2 - Get envolved on helping develop OSArch software;

6.3 - Suggest FOSS software or methodologies to improve the workflow or fill gaps in workflow;

6.4 - Suggest more ways on how to use OSArch software to complement proprietary software.

6.3 - Create software to fill the gap in OSArch workflow.

Besides the structure of the wiki not being clear, the image of the wiki also doesn't help at all. It's confusing for me. Is there any better looking platforms that can make OSArch more sexy without loosing the editing capabilities of a wiki?

J by JanF on 8 Sep 2020 # +2 votes

@JQL can you check the draft I prepared on my talk page? (and perhaps put yours together too?)

https://wiki.osarch.org/index.php?title=User_talk:JanF

Also pinging @duncan for the wiki mainpage discussion.

I have mostly similar opinion on the matter. The only thing I am not so certain about is the focus on software being and not being "under the umbrella". Why is it so important to you? As far as I know, only BlenderBIM and Freecad are developed with the active focus on OSArch. (and also the connection to proprietary software, getting things to work with FOSS is challenge enough)

About being sexy, it is a wiki. It's purpose is not really atracting new people, it is communicating in a simple and understandable way. There was a discussion about a homepage, with the result that we will focus on attracting new people first when we have enough accessible content to keep them interested.

B by brunopostle on 8 Sep 2020, edited 8 Sep 2020 # +2 votes

@JQL the community is here because collaboration is more fun than working alone, the wiki is here because it turns out that some of us have lots of hard-won knowledge that needs to be shared - Even for people who have been doing it for years the BIM world looks like a crazy soup of acronyms, and we need to know what technologies and standards are worth bothering-with.

There have been a lot of false starts over the years, dead mailing lists, promising tools that faded away (pythoncad anyone?), but this time freecad has substantial momentum, and blenderbim seems like such an obvious idea in retrospect. The risk is that a hundred thousand architects who are already familiar with Blender all adopt blenderbim at the same time, this needs to be a good experience all around, Dion alone can't support even a small part of the potential userbase. This could be the lull before the storm, blenderbim is being developed with a small audience who are knowledgable and familiar with free software development, and that can contribute positively, for now.

J by JQL on 8 Sep 2020 # +1 votes

The umbrella expression is a strong one. I don't think I came up with it but it made sense for me to make a frame of mind. Maybe the chain expression is better as it describes a workflow with links.

It's important to be or not in the chain because users like me would want to know who is involved and in what way. Who is who,what software does what and if we trust the people behind are actively seeking their place in the chain or not, or in what kind of way they will commit to make the chain work by fulfilling their link.

If we were discussing a single software here, we would want it to evolve until the point we were expecting it to. If we are talking about several different apps we should know if they commit or not to get to the point they need to get to form their link in the chain.

Regarding the sexy looking site, I am now interested in following this. I had to investigate through a lot of stuff until I formed my idea of what OSArch is. It's probably still a wrong idea, how many of us users will get through the process I did just to know more about this?

A wiki like the one that exists is good for people that are involved in the process already but people must first be aware of this in a simple and straightforward way. Building a sexy and straight forward with will help with initial engagement, with getting more people on board and it doesn't need to offer them a product, it just needs to inform them of what's happening and that it's wip but the goal is cool. If people wouldn't be interested in participating at this point, they could at least subscribe to follow news about it and get info when some milestone would be achieved.

Followers would be potential users in the future.

If the wiki could be sexy enough then great, if not, then having a front side besides the wiki could help OSArch by clearly stating what it is, what's at stake and how is development of related software or workflow objectives.

Then they could jump to the forum, download some pieces of software and experiment, enroll on development or simply wait until further news.

If the whole idea is more appealing and simply presented, people will probably have more interest in following development.

J by JQL on 8 Sep 2020 #

@JanF I've seen your wiki page at that link and I must tell you that if I had bumped into it in a first moment I wouldn't have had so many confusion and duh moments.

@brunopostle I agree with everything you said. Would you say OSArch is based mainly in these two apps?

Why not create robust info about them within OSarch and start from there. They are solid starting ground with tremendous potential. People must know what they are capable of (FreeCAD is at a different state) and how they can get involved. Right now what's needed exactly and how can we contribute is really hard to tell for people coming from outside.

Users like me, without programming knowledge, that are not using blender nor FreeCAD, will feel particularly left out.

B by baswein on 8 Sep 2020 #

@JQL said:

Besides the structure of the wiki not being clear, the image of the wiki also doesn't help at all. It's confusing for me. Is there any better looking platforms that can make OSArch more sexy without loosing the editing capabilities of a wiki?

It looks like you can do different skins for the Wiki. I have no experience with this and it may be more difficult then it looks to implement.

A review with some good looking ones:

https://bluespice.com/top-10-mediawiki-skins/

J by JQL on 8 Sep 2020, edited 8 Sep 2020 #

Hi @baswein

This one seemed nice:

https://www.physio-pedia.com/home/

It's based on this skin:

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Skin:Chameleon

EDiT:

Actually this is the wiki structure, the frontpage is not from the wiki skin, it's a regular page. The wiki is also well organized and easy to read:

https://www.physio-pedia.com/Physiopedia:About

It just lacks the subscribe newsletter.

"Want to know about OSArch progress?

Sign the newsletter and we'll let you know when the next milestone is achieved."

It would be an important feature of the site to bump up interest of people that once came and then were gone without involving themselves. If certain milestones would be reached or new workflows would arise, people could engage again.

D by duncan on 16 Sep 2020 #

Great discussion! Thanks @JQL for taking the time to share your impressions. I've got too many other things on my plate just now to work much on the wiki.

I think what @JanF has been doing looks great and I think Jan, you should just implement it. I like how you try to bring example workflows more to peoples attention.

@Moult could you add a text to the main osarch.org page? https://wiki.osarch.org/index.php?title=User_talk:JanF

"The Open-Source Architecture Community brings together like-minded users and developers who share a common goal: that the built environment can be designed, constructed, operated, and recycled with free/libre software and open-source software with increased transparency, and a more ethical approach. We're creating a place where everyone involved in the built environment's conception and life can meet, inspire and collaborate to develop empowering digital tools. "

@JQL you raised the question of an 'umbrella' which is a very important discussion. Please continue that discussion on governance if you want to discuss that further here https://community.osarch.org/discussion/comment/2394#Comment_2394 (where I see you've joined in)

Now that you've helped us focus on what is unclear you can maybe help us improve our communication.

S by stephen_l on 16 Sep 2020 #

From last meeting, i just want to raise attention about youtube/any video as documentation support.

The main issue with fast envolving dev is documentation validity over time, often more troublesome than it should, as old features may remains while removed / changed in the code.

I guess the same will apply with documentation about workflows.

M by Moult on 16 Sep 2020 #

@JanF and @duncan please feel free to edit the front page with your initiatives :) No need to ask for permission! There is a saying in FOSS - those who do the work, make the decisions.

J by JQL on 17 Sep 2020 #

@duncan and what are the vehicles for communication here?

For OSArch I see:

site
wiki
forum

For BlenderBIM I see:

site
OSArch forum

...

I'm not pro in communications, my own office's social networks are lousy... it's all based on word of mouth and eye on eye contact.

In this case @JanF is talking about tutorials. A youtube channel should be there, for instance. But is it OSArch's or is it BlenderBIM. They do look blended as if they are the same sometimes. Maybe a clearer separation would benefit communication and would help more people feel OSArch as neutral ground and join in.

But then, should there be a clear separation between OSArch and BlenderBIM or other software that wants to join? Should each software should have it's own in house publications and then OSArch could republish and provide wider scope in the forum, as well as Publish interdepent workflows, and provide info on how to relate stuff.

Could OSARch also also provide some kind of newsletter for AEC OpenSource and free software?

Or should it be that OSArch, as the "umbrella", that centers in itself all communication, tutorials and also workflows for the apps that decide to join in? Like a mother company that specializes in "marketing" and feed it's subcompanies.

The umbrella expression was not the best for everyone so I imagine this is not the path. However, having a community of users that helps building tutorials and workflows is where most of us could probably be helpful for the developers.

D by duncan on 17 Sep 2020, edited 17 Sep 2020 #

@Moult I mean change to this page: http://osarch.org - I'm not sure if others have access to that.

@JQL I don't think there will be much clarity before we do some more work on what we are as an organization. But I'm pretty sure the main text at the wiki explains what we are. There is a longer text, but the theme is the same. Basically OSArch will become exactly what people are willing and able to make it. If you see a problem or two that needs fixing - go ahead and fix it. I think a newsletter would be a great idea. Maybe a monthly blog, maybe a podcast with interviews, whatever. For now though no-one can speak for OSArch, we just all support a common goal.

J by JanF on 20 Sep 2020, edited 20 Sep 2020 #

I reorganized the landing page, I think it should give a clearer message of our aim now. I hope I haven't broken any links, I added an Archicad category, the rest of the links that used to be on the main page and don't fit the the new structure should be easily found in the proper category.

https://wiki.osarch.org/index.php?title=Home_of_OSArch

M by Moult on 20 Sep 2020 #

@duncan homepage updated! Thanks for the input!

@JanF I like it much better now! Your work is great!

C by Cyril on 7 Oct 2020, edited 7 Oct 2020 #

At some point there was questioning about the wiki tool. I can't find the post and if it was in this thread. MediaWiki is supposed to be known by almost everyone as it is the engine behind Wikipedia but it always feels cumbersome to me. I am also a little tired to switch from markdown which is almost used everywhere now to MediaWiki.

Has anyone experimented Wiki.js ? It is :

self hostable (AGPL 3 license)
supporting markdown
quite popular (11.2 k stars on GitHub currently)
allowing multi-language content
supporting code highlighting
git-able
supporting plain HTML (which probably allow us to integrate peertube videos)
providing a visual builder for non technical people which don't know what markdown is
planned to support WikiText to allow easy migration from MediaWiki
supporting many other interesting features

R by ReD_CoDE on 7 Oct 2020 #

Hi @Cyril I think there's a better choice. Check this out: https://github.com/github/docs

J by JanF on 20 Oct 2020, edited 20 Oct 2020 # +1 votes

@duncan can we change the MediaWiki:Sidebar (main menu) to something like this?

OSArch navigation

** mainpage|mainpage-description

** AEC_Free_Software_directory|Software directory

** AECO_Workflow_Examples|Workflow directory

Featured software

** Category:BlenderBIM_Add-on|BlenderBIM

** Category:FreeCAD|FreeCAD

Wiki navigation

** recentchanges-url|recentchanges

** randompage-url|randompage

** helppage|help-mediawiki

SEARCH
TOOLBOX
LANGUAGES

I think the current menu is quite unattractive, especially for people who come more often.

D by duncan on 26 Oct 2020 # +2 votes

@JanF see if the you like the new design. Do you think that's a fair and useful selection of featured software? I wanted to show more than just modelling software. I'll start a separate thread asking how we want our software pages to look.

M by Moult on 8 Nov 2020 # +1 votes

A note that @Cyril and I also tested WikiJS, which is a bit more "modern" than Mediawiki and supports Markdown, which can lower the barrier to entry to contributors. There were a few issues, which when put together, mean that I would feel uncomfortable with migrating:

No auto migration script
Guests cannot edit, you need an account
A page can be authored with a visual editor, markdown, or HTML, but once it is authored, it is locked for life to use that syntax.
No way of seeing a feed of recent changes for monitoring / auditing
Not as mature an ecosystem as Mediawiki

C by Cyril on 8 Nov 2020 #

Proposed homepage looks clearer to me. I just find that the Explore Free Software title seems passive and don't expect how to in this section. Maybe Use instead of Explore.

S by stephen_l on 8 Nov 2020 #

Any "Rich text editor" plugin available ?

Could be a better option so user will not have to deal with any "low level" html / markdown, but rather use javascript powered text editor with good looking set of icons for common styles like the simple one we do have here.

D by duncan on 8 Nov 2020, edited 8 Nov 2020 #

I think it goes in the right direction, maybe we can discuss what the three columns should be, but the three column thing is also the direction I was thinking of going. The three columns I've been toying with are

Learn | Create | Contribute

Learn: Theory, BIM, OpenBIM, IFC ...

Create: Software list, how to, workflows, guides ...

Contribute: Learn to code, donate, discussion forum, IRC ...

(those are not suggestions for articles or anything, just me thoughts on the type of content)

I suggest we just switch to it and work on it from there. @Moult I couldn't find the link you mentioned to the IRC channel. Can you add that to the 'Get involved section'.

D by duncan on 8 Nov 2020 #

I want to merge this with the https://community.osarch.org/discussion/114/osarch-website-design discussion. Do we agree we want to keep things in the same discussions? It makes it easier for people to subscirbe to relevant discussion without having to watch for related posts all the time. I know I'd prefer it.

R by ReD_CoDE on 8 Nov 2020, edited 8 Nov 2020 #

@Moult This is the second time I suggest GitHub Docs: https://github.com/github/docs

Also, hopefully soon, they will have a ready-to-use package too: https://github.com/github/docs/issues/205

M by Moult on 8 Nov 2020 # +1 votes

Based off the comments from the monthly meetup I spent today redesigning the OSArch wiki homepage.

Before: https://wiki.osarch.org/index.php?title=Home_of_OSArch

After: https://wiki.osarch.org/index.php?title=User:Moult

The objectives:

Decrease the scrollbar on the homepage. A long scroll means a users get intimidated.
Make the layout look more modern, I've used open source fonts like Open Sans (headings) and Lato (body) to provide a more modern & lighter look and feel. I've also removed the bright primary colours at the header and footer, and softened the search bar with rounded corners.
Make the homepage less texty. A big blurb with a short sentence (the long explanation can be migrated to the "read more about osarch" page), and some more graphical elements.
Made the three main portions of the site more obvious by creating a 3 column layout (get involved, learn software, learn concepts)
Reworded article titles (I didn't move any pages yet) to focus on user "how to" terminology to make the content more relatable
Added more links to the more fleshed out pages which I think would give users a typical idea of the wiki content at a glance without needing to search or click through more links.

If you think it's a movement in the right direction, let me know and I'll merge it to the homepage, and we can continue to tweak and write more content.