From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcelo de Moraes Serpa Subject: Re: [OT] Current website not very attractive Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 11:43:06 -0500 Message-ID: References: <3115.1344571324@alphaville> <3756.1344580257@alphaville> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba6e8cfed7ea9304c6ec09e6 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38240) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SzsIp-0007t6-8p for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 12:43:14 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SzsIl-00065d-Kb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 12:43:11 -0400 Received: from mail-yx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.213.169]:56654) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SzsIl-00065M-FT for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 12:43:07 -0400 Received: by yenl1 with SMTP id l1so1968539yen.0 for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 09:43:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3756.1344580257@alphaville> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: nicholas.dokos@hp.com Cc: Sankalp , Org Mode , Jude DaShiell --90e6ba6e8cfed7ea9304c6ec09e6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hey guys, Didn't mean to start any kind of flame. @Nick: I'm not a designer, more of a hybrid coder with some design foundations, but I'm definitely willing to help. I don't like the current layout because of it's overuse of shadows and its "web1"-style layout. Also, typography could use some improvement, and we could also use a better screenshot, to give a better first impression. - Marcelo. On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:30 AM, Nick Dokos wrote: > Nick Dokos wrote: > > > Sankalp wrote: > > > > > --f46d044401de1e3ad604c6de28a7 > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > > > > > I'm inclined to agree with Marcelo. > > > -- > > > Sankalp > > > > > > ******************************************************* > > > If humans could mate with software, I'd have org-mode's > > > babies. > > > --- Chris League on Twitter. > > > http://orgmode.org/worg/org-quotes.html > > > ******************************************************* > > > > > > > > > On 10 August 2012 04:44, Jude DaShiell > wrote: > > > > > > > Good, that probably means it's one of the more accessible and usable > web > > > > sites on the internet. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 9 Aug 2012, Marcelo de Moraes Serpa wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hey list, > > > > > > > > > > Don't want to be negative, but doesn't anyone else also think the > current > > > > > design is kind of amateurish and not very attractive? I also did > not like > > > > > the screenshot used, I preferred the previous one, it showed more > org > > > > > capabilities, and the colors and indentation looked better. > > > > > > > > > > My two cents and food for thought, > > > > > > > > > Talk is cheap: how would you improve it? And I don't mean generalities: > build > > a website as you think it should be and then invite us over to take a > look. > > And as Jude suggests, don't forget to keep accessibility/usability > issues > > in mind as you design. > > > > Nick > > > > It has been pointed out to me that my comments might be taken as > "overbearing". Not my intent, but I will take back the "talk is > cheap" part (or repeat it to myself as the target this time) and > apologize for it: I should have reread the mail before hitting send. > > But the larger point is still there: "I don't like it" is a legitimate > response, but is not nearly as helpful as giving a list of reasons > of *why* you don't like it. And providing something you *like* is even > better. E.g. would the current design with the previous screen shot be > OK? Or are there deeper problems? > > Nick > > --90e6ba6e8cfed7ea9304c6ec09e6 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey guys,

Didn't mean to start any kind of flame.

@Nick: I'm not a designer, more of a hybrid code= r with some design foundations, but I'm definitely willing to help. I d= on't like the current layout because of it's overuse of shadows and= its "web1"-style layout. Also, typography could use some improve= ment, and we could also use a better screenshot, to give a better first imp= ression.=A0

- Marcelo.

On = Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 1:30 AM, Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com>= ; wrote:
Nick= Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> wrote:

> Sankalp <sankalpkhare@gma= il.com> wrote:
>
> > --f46d044401de1e3ad604c6de28a7
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
> >
> > I'm inclined to agree with Marcelo.
> > --
> > Sankalp
> >
> > *******************************************************
> > If humans could mate with software, I'd have org-mode's > > babies.
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 --- Chris Lea= gue on Twitter.
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0http://orgmode.org/worg/org-quotes.html=
> > *******************************************************
> >
> >
> > On 10 August 2012 04:44, Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@shellworld.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Good, that probably means it's one of the more accessibl= e and usable web
> > > sites on the internet.
> > >
> > > On Thu, 9 Aug 2012, Marcelo de Moraes Serpa wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey list,
> > > >
> > > > Don't want to be negative, but doesn't anyone e= lse also think the current
> > > > design is kind of amateurish and not very attractive? I= also did not like
> > > > the screenshot used, I preferred the previous one, it s= howed more org
> > > > capabilities, and the colors and indentation looked bet= ter.
> > > >
> > > > My two cents and food for thought,
> > > >
>
> Talk is cheap: how would you improve it? And I don't mean generali= ties: build
> a website as you think it should be and then invite us over to take a = look.
> And =A0as Jude suggests, don't forget to keep accessibility/usabil= ity issues
> in mind as you design.
>
> Nick
>

It has been pointed out to me that my comments might be taken a= s
"overbearing". =A0Not my intent, but I will take back the "t= alk is
cheap" part (or repeat it to myself as the target this time) and
apologize for it: I should have reread the mail before hitting send.

But the larger point is still there: "I don't like it" is a l= egitimate
response, but is not nearly as helpful as giving a list of reasons
of *why* you don't like it. And providing something you *like* is even<= br> better. E.g. would the current design with the previous screen shot be
OK? Or are there deeper problems?

Nick


--90e6ba6e8cfed7ea9304c6ec09e6--