| 1 |
Flammie Pirinen wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2005-11-25, Curtis Napier sanoi, jotta: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>>I honestly thought that the changes I made were better from an |
| 6 |
>>accessibility standpoint. I guess I was wrong. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Not really. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>>So on that note, I've gone over the design and gotten it closer to |
| 13 |
>>Aarons's reference. [...] Check out what I did change in the meantime. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Uh-oh. The usability regression from what the site was yesterday is |
| 17 |
> unbelievable. Almost all of the texts are too small to read again, and |
| 18 |
> the color combinations are also unreadable again. I hope that you and |
| 19 |
> Aaron are still going to take into account at least all the usability |
| 20 |
> related requests from the feedback you asked, because I'd be pretty |
| 21 |
> annoyed to see yet another web site redesign that manages to make |
| 22 |
> original website even more unusable than it was. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Sorry, I should have been a little more clear. What I meant in my last |
| 27 |
email is that I would get the site to match Aarons current reference and |
| 28 |
then he and I, working together as a team, would then address all the |
| 29 |
issues that were brought up during the last round of feedback. Aarons |
| 30 |
input as the designer will be make it so much easier to make sure those |
| 31 |
accessibilty/other feedack is incorporated in a way that is pleasing to |
| 32 |
look at and integrates with Aarons original design. This is how it |
| 33 |
should have been done from the beginning as I already said in my last |
| 34 |
email. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Sorry for any confusion. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
ps. I'm moving all discussion of this to the www-redesign@g.o |
| 40 |
mailing list. I'll start a new thread there right now. Anyone who wants |
| 41 |
to participate should sign up for that list. |
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
www-redesign@g.o mailing list |
Archives