From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: brian powell Subject: Re: [OT] Current website not very attractive Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:56:50 -0400 Message-ID: References: <3115.1344571324@alphaville> <3756.1344580257@alphaville> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1ed3cb4105504c6eebef0 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45751) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SzvKJ-0000tP-I0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:56:57 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SzvKG-0006pr-Au for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:56:55 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f169.google.com ([209.85.214.169]:45588) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SzvKG-0006p6-2S for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:56:52 -0400 Received: by obhx4 with SMTP id x4so3238186obh.0 for ; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 12:56:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: 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: Marcelo de Moraes Serpa Cc: Sankalp , nicholas.dokos@hp.com, Org Mode , Jude DaShiell --e89a8fb1ed3cb4105504c6eebef0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 * The site looks great as it is. ** Its supposed to be simple and simple-looking: *** Go to: http://orgmode.org => Read the top line: "Org: Your Life in Plain Text" *** Go to: http://doc.norang.ca/org-mode.html => Read the top line: "Org Mode - Organize Your Life In Plain Text!" * Simplicity and portability is a huge part of the point of OrgMode right!? * EMACS and TeX and Texinfo, etc. are great (partially) because they have been ported to all platforms. ** So, if you make any changes, you should be able to convert the end webpages to Texinfo so they are readable and printable on all computers and printers. --I just hope that whoever "wins the contest" creates web pages that are "501 compliant" and everyone can read on any computer using any operating system and browser and those webpages are as printable as a Texinfo document. On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Marcelo de Moraes Serpa < celoserpa@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 >> >> > --e89a8fb1ed3cb4105504c6eebef0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * The site looks great as it is.

** Its supposed to be s= imple and simple-looking:

*** Go to:=A0http://orgmode.org =3D>

Read the top line: "Org: Your Life in Plain Text"


= Read the top line: "Org Mode - Organize Your Life In Plain Text!"=

* Simplicity and portability is a huge part of the poin= t of OrgMode right!?

* EMACS and TeX and Texinfo, = etc. are great (partially) because they have been ported to all platforms.<= /div>

** So, if you make any changes, you should be able to c= onvert the end webpages to Texinfo
so they are readable and print= able on all computers and printers.=A0

--I just ho= pe that whoever "wins the contest" creates web pages that are &qu= ot;501 compliant" and everyone can read on any computer using any oper= ating system and browser and those webpages are as printable as a Texinfo d= ocument.



On Fri, Aug 10, 2012= at 12:43 PM, Marcelo de Moraes Serpa <celoserpa@gmail.com> wrote:
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, ty= pography could use some improvement, and we could also use a better screens= hot, to give a better first impression.=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@gmail.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> wrot= e:
> >
> > > 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



--e89a8fb1ed3cb4105504c6eebef0--