Case file02
Group editorial platform
A house published its voice by email to a provider. It now publishes itself, in three languages, without degrading its image.
- INSTITUTIONAL WEBSITE
- FRANCE / MONACO / SWITZERLAND
- REFERENCE ON REQUEST
What the client entrusted to us
A heritage services house wanted to regain control of its public voice. Its historic website had grown by accumulation: an institutional page, then satellite sites opened as activities grew, each with its own visual identity, hosting and provider.
Publishing a news item meant writing to a provider, waiting, then checking. Translations were prepared in separate documents, unlinked from the pages actually published. The house’s identity diluted as media multiplied.
The engagement was therefore not about a “new website” but an editorial platform: a system able to uphold the house’s image over years, in several languages, in its own teams’ hands.
The starting point
What the diagnosis revealed.
Before any technical proposal, we write down the real state — including what unsettles. This description, validated by the teams, is what makes the rest verifiable.
- 01
Four media, four identities
The institutional website and three activity sites coexisted with no shared visual grammar: no shared typography, no image treatment rules.
- 02
Publishing depended on a third party
Every update went through an email to the provider, with its delays, back-and-forth and involuntary rewording.
- 03
Disconnected translations
The English and Italian versions lived in office documents, never aligned with the real state of the pages.
- 04
Unoptimised images
Photographs of several megabytes were served as-is, including on mobile, at the expense of reading comfort.
- 05
Structure invisible to search engines
No structured data, headings chosen for visual effect, content with no exploitable semantic hierarchy.
- 06
Untreated accessibility
Insufficient contrast, incomplete keyboard navigation, forms without associated labels.
Constraints
What could not be compromised.
- 01
The house’s image is non-negotiable
The finish had to stay that of a heritage services house, on every page and every medium.
- 02
Teams must publish alone
No publication was to require technical intervention or a pass through a provider ever again.
- 03
Three languages held over time
Every piece of content had to exist in three languages, with clear tracking of what remains to translate.
- 04
Accessibility and search from the design stage
These requirements could not be handled afterwards, as a correction applied at project end.
- 05
No added dependency
No ad network, no tracker, no third-party font: the site’s promise applied to the new one too.
- 06
Progressive takeover, no breakage
Legacy media had to be absorbed without losing the authority already earned with search engines.
The AIGYROS answer
What we built.
We started with structure: what content does the house actually publish, in which forms, with which variants? This analysis produced an editorial model — news, activity page, reference, institutional page — and a single information architecture meant to absorb the satellite sites.
The design system was written before the pages: type scale, colours, rules, documented components. It sets the house’s grammar and lets teams compose new pages without leaving it.
Multilingual publishing was treated as an editorial object, not a copy: each piece of content carries its versions, its state and its gaps. Teams see what remains to translate, language by language.
The performance budget, semantic structure and accessibility compliance were written into the specification from day one, then verified at each delivery. Legacy addresses were taken over through permanent redirects, page by page.
Conduct
Four stages, held in this order.
Stated durations are orders of conduct magnitude, never commitments: each engagement is recalibrated on its own ground.
- 01Editorial analysis phase
Structure
Audit of existing media, definition of the editorial model and target architecture, address takeover plan.
- Audit of media and earned search ranking
- Editorial model and target architecture
- Inventory of content to take over, rewrite or remove
- Permanent redirect plan
- 02Design phase
Compose
Documented design system, page templates and photographic treatment rules, validated by the house.
- Documented design system
- Page templates and components
- Photographic treatment rules
- Mock-ups validated by the house
- 03Development phase
Build
Template and publishing-area development, multilingual, performance and structured data.
- Template and publishing-area development
- Multilingual publishing and version tracking
- Performance budget and structured data
- Accessibility compliance checked at each delivery
- 04Go-live phase
Hand over
Team training, editorial guide, domain cutover and performance indicator tracking.
- Publishing training for teams
- Editorial guide and usage charter
- Redirects and domain cutover
- Performance indicator tracking
What changes
Before, after — no showcase figures.
We do not publish improvement percentages: they cannot be verified from outside. What can be described, on the other hand, is the daily gesture that changes.
- Initial situationAfter the engagement
Initial situation: Publishing went through a provider
After the engagement: Teams publish themselves, autonomously
Initial situation: Four media, four identities
After the engagement: One grammar, a documented design system
Initial situation: Translations kept in separate documents
After the engagement: Aligned versions, gaps visible language by language
Initial situation: Unoptimised served images
After the engagement: Adaptive images, held loading budget
Initial situation: Structure invisible to search engines
After the engagement: Semantic hierarchy and structured data
Initial situation: Accessibility handled afterwards
After the engagement: Compliance checked at each delivery
Deliverables
What stays in your hands.
An engagement is also judged by what it leaves behind. Every deliverable is written to be read without us.
- 01
Editorial model
The house’s content types, their fields and composition rules.
- 02
Design system
Type scale, colours, rules and documented components, reusable without us.
- 03
Publishing guide
Editorial and technical manual for the teams publishing daily.
- 04
Redirect plan
Page-by-page mapping between legacy addresses and the new architecture.
- 05
Accessibility report
Checkpoints, gaps found and corrections applied, page by page.
- 06
Performance dashboard
Loading indicators tracked over time, with alert thresholds.
Excluded scope
What the engagement did not include.
A blurry scope costs more than an incomplete one. So we write it down in black and white, from the proposal stage: what is handled, and what is not.
- Photograph production: the house supplied its own visuals.
- Drafting institutional content, reviewed and validated by the house.
- Paid acquisition campaigns and social media management.
- The client extranet, studied separately after the public site went live.
An institutional websiteis not a showcase.
Case file
Group editorial platform
Case 02 — Institutional website
Area of operation: France / Monaco / Switzerland
Other case files
Prendre contact
Does your situation resemble one of these?
Tell us about your environment, your constraints and what cannot be compromised. We answer with analysis, not a catalogue.