Difference between revisions of "IGEM:Melbourne/2008/WikiManagement/OtherTeams"

From OpenWetWare
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 4: Line 4:
 
== '''FINAL''' ==
 
== '''FINAL''' ==
  
===ETHZ 2007===
+
ETHZ 2007
 +
*Good
 +
** ETH Zurich drop down bar on each page
 +
** ETHZ banner on each page leads to homepage
 +
** Vistor count at the bottom of the page
 +
** Nice meet the team page
  
'''Good'''
+
*Not so good
 +
** First page too dense
  
* ETH Zurich drop down bar on each page
 
* ETHZ banner on each page leads to homepage
 
* Vistor count at the bottom of the page
 
* Nice meet the team page
 
  
 +
Harvard 2007
 +
* Intro good - What the project was, What they had achieved, What it could achieve in the future (applications)
  
'''Bad'''
 
  
* First page too dense
+
UC Berkeley 2007
  
 +
* Nice brief description of the different components (with links to pages with details including results). 
 +
** Do we want to introduce the components on the front page?
  
===Harvard 2007===
 
  
* Intro good
+
===Chiba 2006===
- What the project was
 
  
- What they had achieved
+
* nice sort of layout on the front page  
 
 
- What it could achieve in the future (applications)
 
 
 
 
 
===UC Berkeley 2007===
 
 
 
* Nice brief description of the different components (with links to pages with details including results). 
 
** Do we want to introduce the components on the front page?
 
  
  
Line 58: Line 53:
  
 
*breaking news section
 
*breaking news section
 +
 +
 +
 +
 +
===Brown 2006===
 +
 +
*concise front page ... emphasises the right things ... (big font = important links - todo list, meetings, biobricks, overview etc)
 +
 +
 +
  
  
Line 67: Line 72:
 
*team photo somewhere on both
 
*team photo somewhere on both
 
*photo(s) of Bio21 ... taken by us not generic
 
*photo(s) of Bio21 ... taken by us not generic
 +
*border design?
 +
*presentation section ... devoted purely to stuff to do with the presentation (berkeley 06)
 +
*calagary 06 nicely design banners/logo? (ie. not done in paint) - we all have friends that could whip something together thats fairly spiffy ;)

Revision as of 00:58, 6 April 2008

Return to Melbourne Homepage


FINAL

ETHZ 2007

  • Good
    • ETH Zurich drop down bar on each page
    • ETHZ banner on each page leads to homepage
    • Vistor count at the bottom of the page
    • Nice meet the team page
  • Not so good
    • First page too dense


Harvard 2007

  • Intro good - What the project was, What they had achieved, What it could achieve in the future (applications)


UC Berkeley 2007

  • Nice brief description of the different components (with links to pages with details including results).
    • Do we want to introduce the components on the front page?


Chiba 2006

  • nice sort of layout on the front page


PRE

Brown 2007

  • Border around front page?
  • Public page - www.brownigem.com -
    • They had a video that got onto the OWW and synbio front page last year - do we want to do this ?


Harvard 2007

  • Good layout
  • Links to tools (plasmid mappers, blast2seq etc...) frequently used stuff
  • Detailed protocols of experiments to date--good
    • should we include protocols when reporting what was done each day or would we prefer to link it to a separate page of protocols like Peking’s?
  • Repeat of details of the same experiment done on a different day not required.
    • could just list changes (if any) made to protocol.


Imperial 2007

  • breaking news section



Brown 2006

  • concise front page ... emphasises the right things ... (big font = important links - todo list, meetings, biobricks, overview etc)




GENERAL IDEAS

  • team photo somewhere on both
  • photo(s) of Bio21 ... taken by us not generic
  • border design?
  • presentation section ... devoted purely to stuff to do with the presentation (berkeley 06)
  • calagary 06 nicely design banners/logo? (ie. not done in paint) - we all have friends that could whip something together thats fairly spiffy ;)