[Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell.org re-design
gcross at phys.washington.edu
Wed Apr 7 13:19:17 EDT 2010
Ooo, I really like this revision; it is a major improvement in your design! I particularly like the picture you chose for the top, and the new way that you have laid out all of the boxes and made the bottom right box a different shade so that it is easier to distinguish it as a different column. Also, I concur with your use of the "inverted pyramid model", even if it comes at the expense of a little redundancy.
My only quibble is that I don't like the fact that the summary text at the top has a font background color, so that there are in essence several boxes around the text of different sizes and with space in between the lines. I recognize that the purpose of the font background was to help the text contrast with the picture behind it, but it would be nicer if there were a better solution, such as by putting a box around all of the text and then filling that with color (so there aren't boxes of different sizes containing the text and empty spaces between the lines), or by putting a translucent box around the text so that we can still see the background but it's faded a bit so that the text still shows up.
On Apr 7, 2010, at 9:53 AM, Thomas Schilling wrote:
> Yup, I have to agree. The Ruby web site certainly is the best web
> site for a programming language that I've come across, but it's
> certainly not "amazing". I like the python documentation design, but
> their home page is a bit dull. Anyway, here's another variation, this
> time with more colour:
> The image is about 80k (while the website alone is < 10k) so I hope
> there won't be any bandwidth issues. Regarding the particular
> (a) I won't post another version for every tiny wibble. You know,
> you can actually post text via email (yes, really!) so if anyone has
> improvements for how the sections should look like, post the suggested
> alternative contents on this list.
> (b) A little redundancy is no problem at all. I try to follow the
> inverted pyramid model: put all the important information at the top,
> and add more details below. If that leads to a small amount of
> duplication so be it.
> (c) As mentioned before, we don't want a perfect home page, we
> simply want a better one. Incremental improvements can be made later
> (d) Who actually *can* update the homepage? Ian, Ross, Malcolm, Simon M?
> (e) I don't have an iPhone, *Droid, or iPad, so I'd need some help
> testing on any of those.
> (f) The design is not fixed width, and most sizes are specified in
> terms of font size or percentages. I merely added a max-width
> restriction so that it still looks decent on maximised screens. I
> tried to remove it, but that just doesn't look good anymore.
> On 7 April 2010 14:19, Daniel Fischer <daniel.is.fischer at web.de> wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch 07 April 2010 04:09:17 schrieb Gregory Crosswhite:
>>> While I think that (d) is a valid concern, it is also important not to
>>> let the perfect be the enemy of the good. If we agree that the proposed
>>> web site layout is sufficiently better than the current one and is "good
>>> enough" aesthetically, then I think we should go ahead and switch to the
>>> new layout and *then* start thinking about how we could make it
>> Good plan.
>>> *completely amazing* like the Ruby web site,
>> www.ruby-lang.org ?
>> Sure, that looks pretty good, but "completely amazing"?
>>> because if we demand
>>> completely amazing for our *first* try then I fear that all that will
>>> happen is that nothing will change because the bar will have been set
>>> too high.
>> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
>> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> Push the envelope. Watch it bend.
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
More information about the Haskell-Cafe