What would you like to see in the Chronicle Online?

[Erin]

I’m doing a little bit of brainstorming here… so I’m going to recruit some thoughts from all of you as well.

We’re trying to look ahead a little bit and make plans for this website’s future. We were really pleased with how the online coverage of the Olympics went, and in this day and age, I think it’s obvious that a lot of attention needs to be paid to the Internet.

So… what would you guys like to see in the Chronicle Online? Short-term and long-term. How would you like the website and magazine to complement each other? If we offered an online-only subscription, would you be interested? Would you want archives of recent articles? What about results? What parts of this site do you use most? What features of other websites do you like?

Any changes will probably be a long way off, but we’d love to hear ideas… so let 'em rip!

[Everythingbutwings]

How about adding a small (small!) additional fee to the regular subscription to access on line. The Natural Horse magazine offers their subscriptions text only, on line only or both. I like getting both so I have a hard copy for reference and when a computer is not available but the on-line version is wonderful as I can use the tools on the PC for search, etc.

[heelsdown]

A lot of good ideas. Personally I don’t like to pay for on line content. I understand that you have to get revenue somewhere but do it with advertising. I do love this site, and I subscribe to the Chronicle. If I had to pay to use the website I’d probably cancel my paper subscription. I wouldn’t pay for both.

[Flash44]

The tack/equipment forum is a great idea. We could describe how products held up in real world use.

[Fairview_Horse_Cente]

How about a photo classified? I would think that would be a good moneymaker for the COH.

[OnyxThePony]

Hi, I’m a new poster, but have been active on this site for well over a year. One thing I’d really like to see is one more chat forum: a general or chit-chat room to discuss things other than horses, or just for fun or lighter topics. I’d also love an online subscription as you have envisioned, as here in Canada, the paper copy rate is just way too expensive, and of course, the news is two weeks old LOL.
Just one more thing if I may: photo archive!
Thanks, Lisa

[Policy_of_Truth]

Erin, would it be possible to add another forum for tack/apparel discussions? I would like to be able to also have a place to rate and to see how others rate all different kinds of tack, etc.
I also like the online COTH subscription…any ideas on what it would cost per month?

[dbtoo]

I really like the idea of being able to search show results by name. Perhaps you could also expand the number of results that you publish. I would rather see the top three in a lot of shows than the top six in a few shows. Show results are the main reason that I subscribe to COTH.

[VA1]

How about a critic section where people can post photos and get feedback?

Otherwise, I love what you guys are doing!

[FirstCry]

I would love to see a reference library, i would also enjoy an online subscription.

[Janet]

First, I would like to be able to submit “letters to the editor” by email, or from the web site.

Second,I would like to be able to access the full content of previous issues on line. I understand the need not to undermine the hard copy magazine, but I don’t think that content over (say) 3 months old would undermine the current issue.

I frequently find myself saying “I saw an article about that a while ago, but which isssue was it? and where did I put it?”.

And putting results on line would add functionality. Often I am looking or a particular horse or rider, so the ability to “find” with my browser is very useful (I do it now with “late news”. Since this is a case where the CURRENT results DO undermine the print version, that part could be made available only to print subscribers, or for a separate subscription.

I do e-business consulting professionally, and one of the key factors to success is an “on-line community”. That you already have. You need to make sure that whatever you do with the web site does not diminish that community.

[pwynnnorman]

I vote wholeheartedly for SEARCHABLE SHOW RESULTS!!!

[VTrider]

I would definitely subscribe to the on-line version of the magazine.I would still like to see the classifieds just as they are presented in the mag. I would also hope that they would include tribute ads - they are fun to look at. It would be nice if they offered the subscription at a lower price since we are saving them money on paper

[This message has been edited by VTrider (edited 10-06-2000).]

[Portia]

Well, as far as the forums go, maybe after the Olympics forum runs its course we could change it to one titled “Just for Fun” or something like that, where the non-serious tack, apparel, funnies, playful stuff could go – that is, if people want it separate – I don’t want to ban it from the other forums by any means.

As for the rest of the site content – Keep the Online Stallion Directory (of course), and keep doing the timely reporting on the big events like John’s Olympics coverage. I like J. Turner’s idea of being able to search for results by rider or horse name. And I’d pay a reasonable amount for an online subscription.

[Louise]

I disagree with adding too many more forums. I think that it would split the interests of the various people who enjoy these topics. I’ve seen it in other forums. You have those who only post on the “serious” forum, those who post only on the “fun” forum, and those who only go to the even more specialized forums that satisfy their needs at that moment. A lot of times, people don’t even bother going to the forums that don’t cater to their specific interests.

The way these forums are set up, we all at least get to see the titles of most of the discussions that are going on. Even if you are mainly interested in one type of discussion or another, sometimes a title will strike your interest and you will “accidently” find a gem of a topic.

At least to me, one of the main plusses of this forum is the sense of community that has evolved. I don’t want that community split into too many different segments. It is hard enough to get to all the forums that have already been set up, why add more? I want the easy opportunity to get to know as many members of this community as I can.

[Canter]

Erin, It would be really terrific as others have said above to be able to subscribe on-line as well. If the entire mag was available in that format, those of us who have to wait eons to get ours in the mail can get the jump on the weekly content and don’t have to resort to threatening the poor postman on a daily basis.

Also, having the Chronicle archived would be a really useful tool…imagine, no more trips to the basement to paw through dusty, mouldy back issues from the '70’s!

I would still keep my hard copy issues - but how much more efficient it would be to search past articles for information.

Currently I find an awful lot of wezines very difficult to read - fonts that don’t hold against a bright background…lack of white space, poor art direction etc, etc.

Do you know if there is better technology/design/layout formats available to suit a webzine format?

Coming from someone who works with the print medium, I can’t get my head around why webzines design and layout is so different from magazine. This should not be the case - I’ve seen plenty of sites like Williams-Sonoma where the website looks just as good as a Martha Stewart magazine.

Unfortunately I’m not a computer “techie” and I really don’t know what the limitations are - I’d just like to see that the webzine is as easy to read as the print version.

[This message has been edited by Canter (edited 10-06-2000).]

[Janet]

One other thing, you need a faster server or faster comm lines, or a different architecture, or something.

The response time here is at about the lower limit of what I am willing to tolerate, and often exceeds the “industry standard” of 8 seconds per page.

I often click on something here, then go do something else (on the computer) for a bit, and then come back to see if it has loaded yet.

(That will be $5,000,000 for professional consulting services, please.)

[Janet]

I would NOT want to see pdf (Adobe Acrobat)as the main format. pdf is great when you want to print things out to read, but I find it slow and unweildy to read online. Also you lose the ability to “find” with your browser.

Maybe have articles available in pdf AS WELL as html for when you want to read them off line.

[J_Turner]

I probably would subscribe to an online version.

More pictures!!! I don’t what the cost factor is in publishing them online, but it’s got to be less than taking up space on the paper page.

Results: What if you had a search feature for results, so as an alternative to reading every little line, you could plug in the name of a rider/horse to see if they appear somewhere. Seems like it could be a simple text search. That would be awesome. Maybe you could include through sixth place in a searchable database, if not on paper. Hey, I think I like this idea the more I think about it!

[JustaLurker]

<BLOCKQUOTE class=“ip-ubbcode-quote”><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Erin:
[B]Canter, HTML is very difficult to use for any sort of layout… the language was just not meant for that. It can be done, but it’s difficult! And often, I think, trying to be fancy makes things look worse, not better. In general, web publications are not as easy to read as paper, which is why it’s hard for them to survive.

J. Turner, the major cost of photos is paying the photographer, although there is also a cost to print them. (Not as much, I don’t think.) More photos online might be a possibility.

Please keep the comments coming! [/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Adobe Acrobat might be something to look into – seriously. The reader is a free download so all of us could get it, and probably many of us already have it.

The creating people, COH in this case, would have to buy the more expensive software to create the documents and get educated on how to do it. I suspect it isn’t all that hard.

After taking a cursory look at the first several pages of documentation for Acrobat itself (a .pdf document), I see that you are able to scan pictures so that requirement should be no problem. I must admit I haven’t read the entire document so don’t know all that much about it.