1 |
On Wednesday 23 November 2005 15:39, Aaron Shi wrote: |
2 |
> > I should have said that the last update was not complete as |
3 |
> > far as design was concerned. I was mainly looking for |
4 |
> > accessibility and rendering issues on as many browsers/OS's |
5 |
> > as possible. I got that feedback and fixed the issues that |
6 |
> > came up. I also implemented the rest of the design so it |
7 |
> > should now be more visually appealing and better match Aarons |
8 |
> > reference design. I took into consideration all of the |
9 |
> > suggestions that were submitted and now ask for additional |
10 |
> > feedback to ensure that my changes didn't introduce any |
11 |
> > additional rendering/accessibility bugs and that the design |
12 |
> > is acceptable to as many people as possible. |
13 |
> > |
14 |
> > If there are no more outstanding issues reported I will |
15 |
> > submit this current layout for approval. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> Sorry, but this looks worse. The colors (other than what's in the |
18 |
> original graphics) are way off. I'm going make a wild guess that an |
19 |
> uncalibrated LCD is being used to view the site. Many panels are not |
20 |
> capable of the full 16.7 million range and uses dithering techniques to |
21 |
> emulate the other colors. So in reality, the colors when viewed on |
22 |
> proper LCD and CRTs are slightly off (but all the "off-ness" in colors |
23 |
> adds up and the combined effect is quite obvious). |
24 |
|
25 |
I agree, the reference still looks better. And indeed an LCD is not really |
26 |
a good judge of colors. |
27 |
|
28 |
> |
29 |
> > Any issues with the |
30 |
> > infinity symbol should have been addressed a year ago. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> Amen. |
33 |
|
34 |
Could you anyway make a version where the infinity symbol is made by |
35 |
clipping two "oh"'s together. I would like to see how they visually |
36 |
compare. I find the infinity symbol to be dissonant towards the "gent" |
37 |
letters. |
38 |
|
39 |
> The reference I made, after listening to comments on the forums, etc., |
40 |
> is what I believe an improvement to the original submission. However, |
41 |
> the live site right now, while the backend is perhaps implemented with |
42 |
> improvements, the frontend (the design) is a deterioration. I |
43 |
> understand there are technical limitations to what's possible. I've |
44 |
> worked with CMS's and combining backend with frontend etc., but it's |
45 |
> about injecting data into the design; not the other way around. This |
46 |
> is usually done after reference templates are done and "locked," and |
47 |
> the final output of the injection effort is usually very close to the |
48 |
> references templates. The Gentoo templating system seems to be such a |
49 |
> way that everyone working on this project, Curtis and myself included, |
50 |
> have to work contrary to normal processes in order to force things to |
51 |
> work. |
52 |
|
53 |
At the time, the design was approved understanding that it would be a |
54 |
guide towards the final looks. Not an absolute this and nothing else. |
55 |
Further the designer (Aaron) was encouraged to participate in |
56 |
implementing his design. Partly to make small improvements, and to fill |
57 |
in the design where it was missing. As such I fully believe that the new |
58 |
reference could be used as basis. |
59 |
|
60 |
> If you look at all of the professionally designed sites on the |
61 |
> Internet, I bet they're using a font size similar to what's in the |
62 |
> reference templates. The reality is, most people are _not_ on 1600x1200 |
63 |
> resolutions and the font used in the live site is just plain huge. I'm |
64 |
> using 1280x1024 and it's still gigantic! (All of my browsers' font zoom |
65 |
> is default.) Even mozilla.org's fonts are about half the size of what |
66 |
> we're using. Looking at other "modern" open source sites, freebsd |
67 |
> (nice facelift), fedora, etc. none of them are using fonts as large as |
68 |
> ours, not even close. The browser's zoom capability is really a |
69 |
> double-edged sword... |
70 |
> |
71 |
> That said, all the "reading/content" fonts are controlled using 1 value |
72 |
> in global.css, change font-size in body and the whole site will change. |
73 |
> The "reading" font I'm referring to is specified for the real |
74 |
> substance on the page that people want to read, i.e. the content. The |
75 |
> philosophy is that content "reading" fonts can be larger or flexible |
76 |
> (hence I put in the font-size adjuster so people can increase/decrease |
77 |
> the content font size and have that remembered in a cookie). However, |
78 |
> fonts that are an inherent part of design should be congruent with the |
79 |
> design itself. |
80 |
|
81 |
I agree, I think that the main text size should be taken from the browser |
82 |
settings. Those are normally reasonable (smaller than wwwredesign) AND |
83 |
what the user prefers. The text zoom function is just a kludge around |
84 |
sites that have been wrongly designed. The font size of menu items could |
85 |
be set, but body size shouldn't. |
86 |
> |
87 |
> Green vs. yellow: |
88 |
> http://www.aaronshi.com/gentoo/problems/greenvsyellow.png |
89 |
> |
90 |
> Pea Green (top) vs. Live Site Green (bottom): |
91 |
> http://www.aaronshi.com/gentoo/problems/greentest.png The bottom one |
92 |
> hurts doesn't it? |
93 |
|
94 |
Yes it does. |
95 |
|
96 |
> |
97 |
> > The "Locator" would require rewrites of not only the XSL but also the |
98 |
> > actual xml files and is outside the scope of this project. |
99 |
> > Touching any |
100 |
> > xml content file is strictly off limits, all existing xml should be |
101 |
> > backwards compatible with the new design. This point is not |
102 |
> > debatable. |
103 |
> > Use of a database would make this task easier while allowing |
104 |
> > backwards |
105 |
> > compatibility but it will have to wait for a future update to |
106 |
> > the site |
107 |
> > to be implemented. |
108 |
> |
109 |
> Fair enough. |
110 |
|
111 |
I think the design should be made to include a locator when given in the |
112 |
page. I would think something like adding an optional "<parent>" tag to |
113 |
the DTD. The DTD would then query the parent for it's parent |
114 |
(recursively) and display that parent, and then this one. (Creating the |
115 |
path). It would be compatible with existing pages, while still allowing |
116 |
forward progress. I see no reason why it would be impossible to change |
117 |
the DTD as long as current pages are still supported. |
118 |
|
119 |
> |
120 |
> > The contents of the uppermost menu are to sites that are outside the |
121 |
> > www.gentoo.org website. They will stay in this location. They |
122 |
> > are green |
123 |
> > to contrast with the purple background to ensure that colorblind and |
124 |
> > other visually impaired people can see it. Green is the compliment to |
125 |
> > purple so I am baffled that people think the combination is not |
126 |
> > attractive. In Aarons preview the light purple color of these |
127 |
> > links is |
128 |
> > not visible to color blind individuals thus it is unacceptable. This |
129 |
> > color will not change. |
130 |
> |
131 |
> The contrast between the purples should be enough, the lighter purple |
132 |
> is roughly 2x brighter than the darker purple. The green makes it |
133 |
> standout too much, especially the live site green. It's distracting. |
134 |
> Originally, this element was intended as an indicator (to complement |
135 |
> the locator) of the Gentoo network site a user is on. If we come back |
136 |
> to asking the fundamental questions, by looking at any given page do I |
137 |
> know where I am? After browsing around, am I still on the same sub |
138 |
> site? Or have I gone from main to planet to bugs to ...? I understand |
139 |
> this is a lost cause, but it's good to know that a "locator" of some |
140 |
> sort is being considered for the future. Breadcrumbs have been a rather |
141 |
> standard feature since the late 90s. |
142 |
|
143 |
And I see no reason to not implement them (as above). |
144 |
|
145 |
> > Graphics should be implemented in the CSS as much as possible to aid |
146 |
> > future maintenance (the xsl templates are huge and not easy |
147 |
> > to maintain. |
148 |
> > The least amount of editing of these files as possible is one of the |
149 |
> > major goals). In text browsers that can handle graphics but don't |
150 |
> > support CSS the upper left logo (which is a background image |
151 |
> > so it can |
152 |
> > be put in the css) will not appear but will leave space for |
153 |
> > the missing |
154 |
> > background image. I can't figure out a way around this. If you have a |
155 |
> > suggestion I would appreciate it. |
156 |
> |
157 |
> I tried to do everything in CSS, which is why having a printable |
158 |
> version of the site |
159 |
> (http://www.aaronshi.com/gentoo/guidepageprint.html) is easy. Nothing |
160 |
> is changed. No CSS files are changed. The _only_ difference is that |
161 |
> the print CSS file is added to the end of the cascade, so that the |
162 |
> print CSS rules overrides certain elements we want to redefine for |
163 |
> print. Basically, with the logically structured HTML, we can change the |
164 |
> design a whole lot without touching the HTML simply by manipulating the |
165 |
> CSS. I.e. I had in mind different themes and elements for xmas, |
166 |
> halloween, etc. and only an extra CSS file is required to add the |
167 |
> changes (without touching the existing CSS files). |
168 |
|
169 |
Besides the fact that I agree with this, it is also the way that things |
170 |
will go in the future as propagated by the W3C. And indeed, css should be |
171 |
used predominantly for the design. |
172 |
|
173 |
> |
174 |
> > Horizontal scrolling of the entire page when a code listing is wider |
175 |
> > than the page only happens in IE. All other browsers |
176 |
> > understand the CSS |
177 |
> > scroll:auto tag and will only scroll the actual code listing. |
178 |
> > The same |
179 |
> > applies to inline images within the page contents. IE is broken but I |
180 |
> > did everything I could to make it behave the same as other browsers. |
181 |
> > This is one issue that IE is simply broken on and there is |
182 |
> > nothing I can |
183 |
> > do to fix that. Javascript fixes are available but the use of |
184 |
> > Javascript |
185 |
> > is strictly forbidden. Javascript is not debatable. |
186 |
> |
187 |
> I think this problem was fixed in my reference page, some googling |
188 |
> uncovered the solution (http://www.aaronshi.com/gentoo/guidepage.html). |
189 |
> If in IE, scale down the window, the scroll bars will automatically |
190 |
> appear on the code listing when necessary. It behaves identically as |
191 |
> in Firefox etc. I'm not too sure what you mean by the inline image |
192 |
> problem, can you explain (maybe a demo is easier)? |
193 |
> |
194 |
|
195 |
I see no reason why javascript could not be used to circumvent the |
196 |
behaviour of certain (enumerated) broken browsers. Normally working |
197 |
browsers do not use the javascript and would look exactly the same with |
198 |
or without javascript enabled. The broken browser looks properly (or as |
199 |
proper as possible with the broken behaviour) though. |
200 |
|
201 |
> > The site is not XHTML it is HTML-4.01 Transitional and it |
202 |
> > passes the w3c |
203 |
> > validator. Manually overriding HTML-4.01 Transitional in the w3c |
204 |
> > validator is not required and any errors that it reports if |
205 |
> > you do this |
206 |
> > will not be addressed. If you can come up with a good |
207 |
> > technical reason |
208 |
> > why doing this would benefit anyone I will address it. |
209 |
|
210 |
Why not implement either html-4.01 strict, xhtml-1.0 (transitional or |
211 |
strict) or even xhtml-1.1. All are compatible with browsers that |
212 |
understand 4.01 transitional. If possible xhtml-1.1 would encertain that |
213 |
the layout and structure of the pages are properly separated. |
214 |
|
215 |
> |
216 |
> The differences between the two specs (at least HTML 4.01 vs. XHTML |
217 |
> 1.0; -- 1.1+ is another story) are not really that significant. I |
218 |
> don't see why we can't switch to XHTML unless there are inherent coding |
219 |
> in the system that we can't mess with. |
220 |
|
221 |
I don't see it either. I also don't see why transitional is needed when we |
222 |
have such a tightly controlled source language. None of the pages |
223 |
actually contains actual html, so having the stylesheet support xhtml-1.1 |
224 |
(has no transitional version) should be straightforward. |
225 |
|
226 |
> |
227 |
> > Navigation and useability studies are beyond my scope. These issues |
228 |
> > should have been addressed a year ago. |
229 |
> |
230 |
> I tried to address those issues (with pages of explainations etc.), but |
231 |
> my suggestions were completely ignored. Hence, I won't say anymore |
232 |
> about this. |
233 |
|
234 |
Please still give your suggestions. I think it is important they are |
235 |
properly performed. |
236 |
|
237 |
> |
238 |
> > The left hand navigation column is dead. No amount of beating |
239 |
> > this dead |
240 |
> > horse will resurrect it. The jumppads will remain at the bottom and |
241 |
> > appear on all non-documentation pages so that those links are |
242 |
> > accessible |
243 |
> > as much as possible. |
244 |
|
245 |
Don't be so thickheaded. |
246 |
|
247 |
> |
248 |
> We can also make additional jump pads if necessary. I only did 3 for |
249 |
> the sample. |
250 |
> |
251 |
> > In Aarons preview the search box and the ads column are placed with a |
252 |
> > Position:absolute and has it's size set. At resolutions below 800x600 |
253 |
> > this makes the ads overlap the content and the search box overlap the |
254 |
> > box to the left on every browser. When content is scarce the |
255 |
> > ads overlap |
256 |
> > the footer. This is not fixable given the current state of |
257 |
> > css support |
258 |
> > in the various browsers. After many many many long hours of |
259 |
> > research and |
260 |
> > experimentation I decided that we would have to resort to a table for |
261 |
> > the ads column and include the search (now donate) box within the div |
262 |
> > that contains the four purple boxes with a % width to fix |
263 |
> > this issue. I |
264 |
> > lowered the % width of the donate box and increased the |
265 |
> > others to bring |
266 |
> > it more inline with Aarons original design. It's not perfect but it's |
267 |
> > close enough. |
268 |
> |
269 |
> It looks fine at 700x500. Even smaller at 640x480, it's still ok. |
270 |
> This is because there's a min-width rule specified for the content |
271 |
> area. Modern browsers should respect this rule (IE doesn't, but |
272 |
> Firefox, etc. and Opera are fine). |
273 |
|
274 |
Actually it is easy to even make IE do such a thing by introducing a |
275 |
"strut" and having a proper overflow behaviour. A strut is an invisible |
276 |
element that has the minimum with required and as such forces that this |
277 |
is the minimum. |
278 |
|
279 |
> http://www.aaronshi.com/gentoo/problems/700x500ref.png |
280 |
> |
281 |
> Speaking of lower resolutions, the author credits takes up the entire |
282 |
> screen (http://www.aaronshi.com/gentoo/problems/700x500live.png). I |
283 |
> originally thought about doing it this way, but after trying with that |
284 |
> same author list it didn't seem right. Hence the design was reworked |
285 |
> to use the side bar, as old Gentoo site does, for author listings. It |
286 |
> seems to work better. |
287 |
|
288 |
Probably right. I think that some flexibility is good. |
289 |
|
290 |
> The side bar overlapping the footer when there is minimal content is a |
291 |
> known issue. It's not as if we have the handbook in the footer. ;) |
292 |
> The alternative is to have the footer block the bottom of the side bar, |
293 |
> but the implementation is much more convoluted that it's not worth it. |
294 |
> On the other hand, the side bar in the live site stops abruptly if the |
295 |
> content is long. If content is the main focus, does it make sense to |
296 |
> show a whole page's worth of white space just so the sidebar can |
297 |
> display entirely? |
298 |
> |
299 |
> > Accessibilty guidelines say that all text links should be |
300 |
> > underlined. I |
301 |
> > made an exception for the grey menu bar for aesthetic |
302 |
> > purposes but will |
303 |
> > not make an exception for any other links. |
304 |
> |
305 |
> My thoughts exactly, although the author list is missing the |
306 |
> underlines. |
307 |
|
308 |
I think that the browser preference should be used. Most browsers |
309 |
underline by default. But if users prefer links not to be underlined, why |
310 |
not respect those users. |
311 |
|
312 |
> In my own site logs, Netscape 4 still out numbers IE5 for Mac (go |
313 |
> figure). It's a simple cost/benefit analysis and in the end is it worth |
314 |
> it to support such non-standard-compliant browsers? What message are |
315 |
> we sending? --- we try to accommodate a few at the cost of the |
316 |
> majority? |
317 |
|
318 |
That's why one should use javascript to enable hacks to work around such |
319 |
broken browsers. Most users get the full behaviour, and the broken |
320 |
browser gets slightly degraded, but controlled behaviour. |
321 |
> |
322 |
> Background should remain white, it's much easier to work with. To make |
323 |
> it easier on the eyes, just lighten up the text a little (i.e. so it's |
324 |
> not black on white which is high contrast but high contrast also |
325 |
> strains the eyes after prolonged reading). I used #515151, which is |
326 |
> 81% gray. The other point for not having colored backgrounds is that |
327 |
> it looks particularly bad on laptops running on battery. When the |
328 |
> screen dims when it's not on AC, it's all over. |
329 |
|
330 |
Also I find that the purple background on the live site makes the site too |
331 |
purple. |
332 |
|
333 |
> > *all extraneous information and decorative news headers were removed |
334 |
> > from the front page to help readability and to bring focus to the |
335 |
> > information. This includes the cow image and text. |
336 |
> > Overwhelming amounts |
337 |
> > of information on the front page should no longer be a problem. This |
338 |
> > also brings the jumppads closer to the top so new users will |
339 |
> > be better |
340 |
> > able to spot them. |
341 |
> |
342 |
> If decoration is used sparingly, it's great. If we want to be purely |
343 |
> information based, and ignore appearance and marketing, we could go |
344 |
> text only. |
345 |
> |
346 |
I agree, we should use the decoration where not superfluous and where |
347 |
there is space. If the decoration causes space issues, it can be |
348 |
reconsidered. |
349 |
|
350 |
Paul |
351 |
|
352 |
-- |
353 |
Paul de Vrieze |
354 |
Gentoo Developer |
355 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
356 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |