You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to docs@httpd.apache.org by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> on 2014/06/15 22:55:52 UTC
Change of web site layout
Hi there, dev@ people (and docs@ cc'ed),
For some time now, a lot of us from the documentation team have been
pondering on making our site, well, not so 1990s looking and unappealing.
We've had some input from various people over time, and together with my
own thoughts, I've come up with a new core template that I plan to
submit to our CMS system if there aren't too many objections.
A mockup front-page featuring this new design can be seen at
http://httpd.apache.pw/ (please don't start browsing the entire site, IT
DOES NOT WORK, it needs to be behind our CMS system to be pretty and
useable).
And yes, this new layout will feature some changes:
- News are placed in a carousel to eliminate the 'wall of text' we
currently have. RMs will have to get acquainted with how to change the
news on the site (which shouldn't be difficult if you look at the source
code, you will still be able to use the CMS to edit it)
- The menu is now a top bar instead of a side bar
- Some menu items have been grouped together differently than before
- The 8 bit feather has been replaced with the 32 bit one.
- It's not quite as...blue
Now, before half the team starts complaining that this uses HTML5,
JavaScript or CSS3, please bear in mind that *we are not the intended
audience*. This is not - and should not be - about what we want, it's
about what modern (non-lynx) users will find attractive or off-putting
about a site.
So, I will leave it to you to either love or hate this idea, and if I
don't hear any (good) arguments against this, I will update the site
layout in about 72 hours. If, however, someone feels very strongly about
not changing status quo, I will of course take it to a vote on dev@ (I
assume docs@ people also follow dev@).
So, throw me some indicative pluses or minuses, or some comments, if you
care about our site :)
With regards,
Daniel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
+1,000,000
On 06/15/2014 04:55 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Hi there, dev@ people (and docs@ cc'ed),
>
> For some time now, a lot of us from the documentation team have been
> pondering on making our site, well, not so 1990s looking and unappealing.
>
> We've had some input from various people over time, and together with my
> own thoughts, I've come up with a new core template that I plan to
> submit to our CMS system if there aren't too many objections.
>
> A mockup front-page featuring this new design can be seen at
> http://httpd.apache.pw/ (please don't start browsing the entire site, IT
> DOES NOT WORK, it needs to be behind our CMS system to be pretty and
> useable).
>
> And yes, this new layout will feature some changes:
>
> - News are placed in a carousel to eliminate the 'wall of text' we
> currently have. RMs will have to get acquainted with how to change the
> news on the site (which shouldn't be difficult if you look at the source
> code, you will still be able to use the CMS to edit it)
> - The menu is now a top bar instead of a side bar
> - Some menu items have been grouped together differently than before
> - The 8 bit feather has been replaced with the 32 bit one.
> - It's not quite as...blue
>
> Now, before half the team starts complaining that this uses HTML5,
> JavaScript or CSS3, please bear in mind that *we are not the intended
> audience*. This is not - and should not be - about what we want, it's
> about what modern (non-lynx) users will find attractive or off-putting
> about a site.
>
> So, I will leave it to you to either love or hate this idea, and if I
> don't hear any (good) arguments against this, I will update the site
> layout in about 72 hours. If, however, someone feels very strongly about
> not changing status quo, I will of course take it to a vote on dev@ (I
> assume docs@ people also follow dev@).
>
> So, throw me some indicative pluses or minuses, or some comments, if you
> care about our site :)
>
> With regards,
> Daniel.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I find the carousel to be unhelpful. Left? Right? Is there an ordering?
> Where is the info I need? I actually clicked the arrows several times until
> I realized there were just three bits of info. It is just too difficult to
> "see at a glance". Carousels like that (IMO) are best for non-"task"
> information. If I arrive and am seeking information, then put it directly on
> the page for me to find quickly.
>
> It is only three boxes of information. The look of the (carousel) box is
> nice. Put three of those vertically on the page, and I'd say you're good.
+1, I think "flatter" is better here.
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> wrote:
> On 06/16/2014 10:33 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> > I find the carousel to be unhelpful. Left? Right? Is there an ordering?
> > Where is the info I need? I actually clicked the arrows several times
> > until I realized there were just three bits of info. It is just too
> > difficult to "see at a glance". Carousels like that (IMO) are best for
> > non-"task" information. If I arrive and am seeking information, then put
> > it directly on the page for me to find quickly.
> >
> > It is only three boxes of information. The look of the (carousel) box is
> > nice. Put three of those vertically on the page, and I'd say you're good.
> >
> I'll give it a try - might take a while to get there, but I'll try :)
> I still would like to use a carousel for other things, perhaps we could
> start adding some blog posts or tips'n'tricks and use it for that?
>
There ya go! ... things that aren't part of my task-at-hand ("why did I
come here? what am I looking for?"). A carousel hides that. But...
supplemental stuff.. sure.
Or to rephrase: I have landed at the page with a goal in mind. How fast can
the page satisfy my need? A carousel holding *my* needed information cannot.
But yes: it does liven up the page, and it can certainly provide some info
that I may have not thought about, or been seeking.
Thanks,
-g
RE: Change of web site layout
Posted by Vincent de Lau <vi...@delau.nl>.
> Van: Daniel Gruno [mailto:rumble@cord.dk]
> Verzonden: dinsdag 17 juni 2014 11:19
>
> I see this discussion going two ways now:
>
> 1) Which overall layout should we pick for the site?
> 2) How do we present out project on the front page?
>
> I think both proposals are valid, and I won't go into "who's got the
> prettiest design", as that's entirely personal opinions, but I think the
> second proposal leaves people wondering "where can I get it, and where
> can I find the changelog/docs/release notes quickly". Not that there
> aren't links to some of it, it's just not that obvious where to click.
If needed, I'm willing to lend a hand in finalizing and cleaning the HTML,
CSS and Javascript when there is consensus over the direction to take.
Regards,
Vincent de Lau
vincent@delau.nl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net>.
On 17 Jun 2014, at 14:24, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
> On 06/17/2014 05:19 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>> On 06/17/2014 12:46 AM, Tim Bannister wrote:
>>> On 16 Jun 2014, at 22:23, Rich Bowen wrote:
>>>
>> In addition, I have some comments about your design proposal:
>>
>> - The apache.org design might be changing RSN (it's being discussed), so using it might not be the most optimal route.
> There is no requirement that a project site look like the main foundation site. Pick any project. Say, http://flume.apache.org/ or http://cloudstack.apache.org/ or http://etch.apache.org/ - each has their own unique feel.
If I could, I'd have httpd and Tomcat use the same site structure. There two projects are complements / substitutes, and users don't particularly like learning a new site layout for each thing.
Tomcat has the same sort of problem with having multiple versions that are out there in production use, too.
…I'm saying this even though I don't have the time or the contacts to liaise with the Tomcat web people properly.
>> - You use JavaScript to display the tabs. This, apparently, needs to be
>> done in a way that people without JS can view it as well. I have tried
>> to accommodate that in my second proposal (see link above).
>> - The documentation link just leads to our boring and unattractive docs
>> front page. I would prefer if people can go directly to documentation
>> for e.g. 2.4 right away from the front page (dropdowns?).
>
> Yes, please.
“+1” to this.
--
Tim Bannister - +44 7980408788 - isoma@jellybaby.net
AW: Change of web site layout
Posted by Plüm,
Rüdiger,
Vodafone Group <ru...@vodafone.com>.
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Ben Reser [mailto:ben@reser.org]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2014 18:03
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org; docs@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: Change of web site layout
>
> On 6/17/14 3:24 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> > There is no requirement that a project site look like the main
> foundation site.
> > Pick any project. Say, http://flume.apache.org/ or
> > http://cloudstack.apache.org/ or http://etch.apache.org/ - each has
> their own
> > unique feel.
> >
> > And, frankly, at this point in time, I think that basing our design
> after the
> > http://apache.org/ design is not at all desirable, as that site has a
> strong
> > feeling of nostalgia too.
>
> The best TLP site I've ever seen at Apache is CouchDB's
>
> http://couchdb.apache.org/
>
> I think it meets all the functional requirements that people have been
> mentioning in this thread while at the same not looking like something
> someone
> made in 1999.
>
> I believe the only thing the Javascript does on this page is make it so
> when
> you click on an anchor in the same page it smoothly scrolls to the
> anchor.
> Without CSS and in Lynx it seems perfectly reasonable.
>
> So if you're looking for something to emulate. It seems like a good one
> to
> emulate.
Good hint. Looks good.
Regards
Rüdiger
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net>.
On 18 Jun 2014, at 17:03, Ben Reser <be...@reser.org> wrote:
> The best TLP site I've ever seen at Apache is CouchDB's
>
> http://couchdb.apache.org/
Some notes to save time (I hope):
I've noticed that there's a credit to “Apache Cordova team for the original design” (Cordova is also a TLP)
The Cordova website project is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB/component/12320562/
The README for Cordova's website is at https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cordova/site/README.md
It's a different CMS using, AFAICT, hastings.
--
Tim Bannister – isoma@jellybaby.net
AW: Change of web site layout
Posted by Plüm,
Rüdiger,
Vodafone Group <ru...@vodafone.com>.
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Ben Reser [mailto:ben@reser.org]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 18. Juni 2014 18:03
> An: dev@httpd.apache.org; docs@httpd.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: Change of web site layout
>
> On 6/17/14 3:24 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> > There is no requirement that a project site look like the main
> foundation site.
> > Pick any project. Say, http://flume.apache.org/ or
> > http://cloudstack.apache.org/ or http://etch.apache.org/ - each has
> their own
> > unique feel.
> >
> > And, frankly, at this point in time, I think that basing our design
> after the
> > http://apache.org/ design is not at all desirable, as that site has a
> strong
> > feeling of nostalgia too.
>
> The best TLP site I've ever seen at Apache is CouchDB's
>
> http://couchdb.apache.org/
>
> I think it meets all the functional requirements that people have been
> mentioning in this thread while at the same not looking like something
> someone
> made in 1999.
>
> I believe the only thing the Javascript does on this page is make it so
> when
> you click on an anchor in the same page it smoothly scrolls to the
> anchor.
> Without CSS and in Lynx it seems perfectly reasonable.
>
> So if you're looking for something to emulate. It seems like a good one
> to
> emulate.
Good hint. Looks good.
Regards
Rüdiger
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>.
On 6/17/14 3:24 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> There is no requirement that a project site look like the main foundation site.
> Pick any project. Say, http://flume.apache.org/ or
> http://cloudstack.apache.org/ or http://etch.apache.org/ - each has their own
> unique feel.
>
> And, frankly, at this point in time, I think that basing our design after the
> http://apache.org/ design is not at all desirable, as that site has a strong
> feeling of nostalgia too.
The best TLP site I've ever seen at Apache is CouchDB's
http://couchdb.apache.org/
I think it meets all the functional requirements that people have been
mentioning in this thread while at the same not looking like something someone
made in 1999.
I believe the only thing the Javascript does on this page is make it so when
you click on an anchor in the same page it smoothly scrolls to the anchor.
Without CSS and in Lynx it seems perfectly reasonable.
So if you're looking for something to emulate. It seems like a good one to
emulate.
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>.
On 6/17/14 3:24 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> There is no requirement that a project site look like the main foundation site.
> Pick any project. Say, http://flume.apache.org/ or
> http://cloudstack.apache.org/ or http://etch.apache.org/ - each has their own
> unique feel.
>
> And, frankly, at this point in time, I think that basing our design after the
> http://apache.org/ design is not at all desirable, as that site has a strong
> feeling of nostalgia too.
The best TLP site I've ever seen at Apache is CouchDB's
http://couchdb.apache.org/
I think it meets all the functional requirements that people have been
mentioning in this thread while at the same not looking like something someone
made in 1999.
I believe the only thing the Javascript does on this page is make it so when
you click on an anchor in the same page it smoothly scrolls to the anchor.
Without CSS and in Lynx it seems perfectly reasonable.
So if you're looking for something to emulate. It seems like a good one to
emulate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 06/17/2014 05:19 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 06/17/2014 12:46 AM, Tim Bannister wrote:
>> On 16 Jun 2014, at 22:23, Rich Bowen wrote:
>>
> In addition, I have some comments about your design proposal:
>
> - The apache.org design might be changing RSN (it's being discussed),
> so using it might not be the most optimal route.
There is no requirement that a project site look like the main
foundation site. Pick any project. Say, http://flume.apache.org/ or
http://cloudstack.apache.org/ or http://etch.apache.org/ - each has
their own unique feel.
And, frankly, at this point in time, I think that basing our design
after the http://apache.org/ design is not at all desirable, as that
site has a strong feeling of nostalgia too.
> - Using the apache.org design will require making a ton of new pages,
> as the menu is not as complex as the original design or my proposal.
There are some new pages that need to be made, but I'm concerned about
getting bogged down and this never happening.
> - Where are the download/changelog links? We need to push that, not
> hide it away.
+1.. The call to action for the httpd site is Documentation,
Release/Change notes, and Download, probably in that order. Ideally, we
push "get involved" a lot, too.
> - The user guide/tips is a great idea on paper, but would require yet
> more new documents, which won't be done until November (at ApacheCon).
> perhaps we could just add those to the carousel?
Yeah, we need to not predicate a design on a bunch of new content. The
content will come, I'm sure, and I've actually been thinking about a
bunch of new content over the last few days (I just went to a
documentation conference!) but it's going to be a long time coming.
> - Adding a search bar is always fun to do, but we don't have the tech
> to implement a search as it is, unless we use Google (which people can
> just use themselves)
The docs already use a custom Google Search thingy. We should extend
that to the entire httpd.a.o site rather than try to implement something
on our own.
Years ago, I approached the Lucene people about site search, but that
never got anywhere. If someone wants to try again, it would be great to
use our own technology. But I don't know how to get from here to there.
> - You use JavaScript to display the tabs. This, apparently, needs to be
> done in a way that people without JS can view it as well. I have tried
> to accommodate that in my second proposal (see link above).
> - The documentation link just leads to our boring and unattractive docs
> front page. I would prefer if people can go directly to documentation
> for e.g. 2.4 right away from the front page (dropdowns?).
Yes, please.
I'd like to do something better with the main docs landing page but
until then, bypassing it would be grand.
> I see this discussion going two ways now:
>
> 1) Which overall layout should we pick for the site?
> 2) How do we present out project on the front page?
>
> I think both proposals are valid, and I won't go into "who's got the
> prettiest design", as that's entirely personal opinions, but I think the
> second proposal leaves people wondering "where can I get it, and where
> can I find the changelog/docs/release notes quickly". Not that there
> aren't links to some of it, it's just not that obvious where to click.
>
The question needs to be, what do people come to the httpd site for?
This is where some actual site usage stats would be lovely to have, but
I don't think we've ever gotten around to doing that. (Tangent - Daniel
- you think this is something that Infra would be the right place to go,
or should we look at doing this ourselves?)
Anecdotally, I believe that the majority of people come for the reasons
enumerated above - Documentation, Change/Release notes (what changed?
Was it a security release?), and Downloads as a distant third, since
most folks are using packages in this century.
I'd like to play up the "get involved" bit a lot more than we currently do.
So, whatever we do, these are the links that need to be most prominent,
and to stand out in the navigation. I think Daniel's design accomplishes
this, while also giving the site a more modern look.
This latter part - the more modern look - is not a "nice to have", but
really is the reason for this exercise in the first place. Our existing
site has all the information, and the links to get to it, but reinforces
the growing perception that Apache httpd is yesterday's web server.
httpd developers are doing amazingly cool stuff, and we suck at telling
the world about it. (By "we", I mean the docs folks, primarily.) We
present it as dry and dusty, and cleverly conceal the fact that we're
out on the bleeding edge and everyone is copying us, but marketing it
better.
Anyways, a huge +1 from me to pushing forward with the work that Daniel
is doing, and also to incorporating Tim's remarks into this, as he seems
to have a clear idea of the kind of information that folks want to have,
as fast as possible, when they come to the site.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 06/17/2014 05:19 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 06/17/2014 12:46 AM, Tim Bannister wrote:
>> On 16 Jun 2014, at 22:23, Rich Bowen wrote:
>>
> In addition, I have some comments about your design proposal:
>
> - The apache.org design might be changing RSN (it's being discussed),
> so using it might not be the most optimal route.
There is no requirement that a project site look like the main
foundation site. Pick any project. Say, http://flume.apache.org/ or
http://cloudstack.apache.org/ or http://etch.apache.org/ - each has
their own unique feel.
And, frankly, at this point in time, I think that basing our design
after the http://apache.org/ design is not at all desirable, as that
site has a strong feeling of nostalgia too.
> - Using the apache.org design will require making a ton of new pages,
> as the menu is not as complex as the original design or my proposal.
There are some new pages that need to be made, but I'm concerned about
getting bogged down and this never happening.
> - Where are the download/changelog links? We need to push that, not
> hide it away.
+1.. The call to action for the httpd site is Documentation,
Release/Change notes, and Download, probably in that order. Ideally, we
push "get involved" a lot, too.
> - The user guide/tips is a great idea on paper, but would require yet
> more new documents, which won't be done until November (at ApacheCon).
> perhaps we could just add those to the carousel?
Yeah, we need to not predicate a design on a bunch of new content. The
content will come, I'm sure, and I've actually been thinking about a
bunch of new content over the last few days (I just went to a
documentation conference!) but it's going to be a long time coming.
> - Adding a search bar is always fun to do, but we don't have the tech
> to implement a search as it is, unless we use Google (which people can
> just use themselves)
The docs already use a custom Google Search thingy. We should extend
that to the entire httpd.a.o site rather than try to implement something
on our own.
Years ago, I approached the Lucene people about site search, but that
never got anywhere. If someone wants to try again, it would be great to
use our own technology. But I don't know how to get from here to there.
> - You use JavaScript to display the tabs. This, apparently, needs to be
> done in a way that people without JS can view it as well. I have tried
> to accommodate that in my second proposal (see link above).
> - The documentation link just leads to our boring and unattractive docs
> front page. I would prefer if people can go directly to documentation
> for e.g. 2.4 right away from the front page (dropdowns?).
Yes, please.
I'd like to do something better with the main docs landing page but
until then, bypassing it would be grand.
> I see this discussion going two ways now:
>
> 1) Which overall layout should we pick for the site?
> 2) How do we present out project on the front page?
>
> I think both proposals are valid, and I won't go into "who's got the
> prettiest design", as that's entirely personal opinions, but I think the
> second proposal leaves people wondering "where can I get it, and where
> can I find the changelog/docs/release notes quickly". Not that there
> aren't links to some of it, it's just not that obvious where to click.
>
The question needs to be, what do people come to the httpd site for?
This is where some actual site usage stats would be lovely to have, but
I don't think we've ever gotten around to doing that. (Tangent - Daniel
- you think this is something that Infra would be the right place to go,
or should we look at doing this ourselves?)
Anecdotally, I believe that the majority of people come for the reasons
enumerated above - Documentation, Change/Release notes (what changed?
Was it a security release?), and Downloads as a distant third, since
most folks are using packages in this century.
I'd like to play up the "get involved" bit a lot more than we currently do.
So, whatever we do, these are the links that need to be most prominent,
and to stand out in the navigation. I think Daniel's design accomplishes
this, while also giving the site a more modern look.
This latter part - the more modern look - is not a "nice to have", but
really is the reason for this exercise in the first place. Our existing
site has all the information, and the links to get to it, but reinforces
the growing perception that Apache httpd is yesterday's web server.
httpd developers are doing amazingly cool stuff, and we suck at telling
the world about it. (By "we", I mean the docs folks, primarily.) We
present it as dry and dusty, and cleverly conceal the fact that we're
out on the bleeding edge and everyone is copying us, but marketing it
better.
Anyways, a huge +1 from me to pushing forward with the work that Daniel
is doing, and also to incorporating Tim's remarks into this, as he seems
to have a clear idea of the kind of information that folks want to have,
as fast as possible, when they come to the site.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Yann Ylavic <yl...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> wrote:
> I have tried to incorporate your suggestions into my own proposal, and
> the result can be seen at http://httpd.apache.pw/index2
I really like this version, +1 for me.
However, as André, I'd also like the ability to download the archives
(hence navigate on the versions' tabs) without javascript and
ajax.googleapis enabled.
Thanks a lot for you work anyway.
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net> wrote:
> think http://httpd.apache.pw/index2 is about right.
Not to be too much of a buzzkill, but my personal preference is the
basic style of the current site (left navigation expanded -- common on
project pages, information about all releases w/o clicking).
I do prefer the banner (but not menu) of the index2 option over the
current top banner and all that stark white.
But I won't let that get in the way over whatever consensus develops.
Just my 2 cents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net>.
On 17 Jun 2014, at 21:36, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
> On 06/17/2014 04:06 PM, Tim Bannister wrote:
>> I thinkhttp://httpd.apache.pw/index2 is about right. To borrow a phrase, I believe in rough consensus and working markup. If we can agree on this as a workable initial design we can move on to other work (the docs overview page, in particular).
> +1
>
> http://httpd.rcbowen.com/manual/ is *NOT* an attempt at page layout, but rather an initial attempt to break the existing content into more audience-targeted categories.
I haven't forgotten about this… but I haven't found time yet either. Probably more like the end of July for me TBH.
--
Tim Bannister – isoma@jellybaby.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 06/17/2014 04:06 PM, Tim Bannister wrote:
> I thinkhttp://httpd.apache.pw/index2 is about right. To borrow a phrase, I believe in rough consensus and working markup. If we can agree on this as a workable initial design we can move on to other work (the docs overview page, in particular).
+1
http://httpd.rcbowen.com/manual/ is *NOT* an attempt at page layout, but
rather an initial attempt to break the existing content into more
audience-targeted categories.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net>.
On 17 Jun 2014, at 10:19, Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> wrote:
> On 06/17/2014 12:46 AM, Tim Bannister wrote:
>> I've made my own mock up front page (attached), which can be a straw man for further discussion. I based this, as you may well have guessed, on the design and styles used at http://www.apache.org/
>>
>> This mockup mentions the #1 position and the 1 years but in its own way.
>
> I like the idea of putting versions into tabs instead of littering the front page with a lot of useless text that you may or may not want to read. We should be pushing 2.4, and as such, that should be the first thing any user sees (they can then click on the 2.2 tab to see 2.2 news :p).
My thoughts too.
I think http://httpd.apache.pw/index2 is about right. To borrow a phrase, I believe in rough consensus and working markup. If we can agree on this as a workable initial design we can move on to other work (the docs overview page, in particular).
My web design skills are mostly a decade out of date, but I'd like to contribute if I can.
--
Tim Bannister – isoma@jellybaby.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 06/17/2014 12:46 AM, Tim Bannister wrote:
> On 16 Jun 2014, at 22:23, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>>
>>> Apache httpd being #1 on the internet is great news, but personally I'd put that on the carousel. What sort of leading text should go in its place? I'm happy to put some work into this.
>>
>> Also, it's the text that's been on our website for at least 15 years. So, yeah, it's probably time to say something different here.
>
> …or say it differently? I've made my own mock up front page (attached), which can be a straw man for further discussion. I based this, as you may well have guessed, on the design and styles used at http://www.apache.org/
>
> This mockup mentions the #1 position and the 1 years but in its own way.
>
I like the idea of putting versions into tabs instead of littering the
front page with a lot of useless text that you may or may not want to
read. We should be pushing 2.4, and as such, that should be the first
thing any user sees (they can then click on the 2.2 tab to see 2.2 news :p).
I also like that you kept the release news short, we don't really need
to say "we're so and so proud of presenting this in conjunction with
them and them", we need to simply say "there's a new version, it
fixes/enhances this and that, go download it or read the changelog".
I have tried to incorporate your suggestions into my own proposal, and
the result can be seen at http://httpd.apache.pw/index2
In addition, I have some comments about your design proposal:
- The apache.org design might be changing RSN (it's being discussed),
so using it might not be the most optimal route.
- Using the apache.org design will require making a ton of new pages,
as the menu is not as complex as the original design or my proposal.
- Where are the download/changelog links? We need to push that, not
hide it away.
- The user guide/tips is a great idea on paper, but would require yet
more new documents, which won't be done until November (at ApacheCon).
perhaps we could just add those to the carousel?
- Adding a search bar is always fun to do, but we don't have the tech
to implement a search as it is, unless we use Google (which people can
just use themselves)
- You use JavaScript to display the tabs. This, apparently, needs to be
done in a way that people without JS can view it as well. I have tried
to accommodate that in my second proposal (see link above).
- The documentation link just leads to our boring and unattractive docs
front page. I would prefer if people can go directly to documentation
for e.g. 2.4 right away from the front page (dropdowns?).
I see this discussion going two ways now:
1) Which overall layout should we pick for the site?
2) How do we present out project on the front page?
I think both proposals are valid, and I won't go into "who's got the
prettiest design", as that's entirely personal opinions, but I think the
second proposal leaves people wondering "where can I get it, and where
can I find the changelog/docs/release notes quickly". Not that there
aren't links to some of it, it's just not that obvious where to click.
I'm running out of keyboard here, so I'll pause for a while and think
some more on the subject.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 06/17/2014 12:46 AM, Tim Bannister wrote:
> On 16 Jun 2014, at 22:23, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>>
>>> Apache httpd being #1 on the internet is great news, but personally I'd put that on the carousel. What sort of leading text should go in its place? I'm happy to put some work into this.
>>
>> Also, it's the text that's been on our website for at least 15 years. So, yeah, it's probably time to say something different here.
>
> …or say it differently? I've made my own mock up front page (attached), which can be a straw man for further discussion. I based this, as you may well have guessed, on the design and styles used at http://www.apache.org/
>
> This mockup mentions the #1 position and the 1 years but in its own way.
>
I like the idea of putting versions into tabs instead of littering the
front page with a lot of useless text that you may or may not want to
read. We should be pushing 2.4, and as such, that should be the first
thing any user sees (they can then click on the 2.2 tab to see 2.2 news :p).
I also like that you kept the release news short, we don't really need
to say "we're so and so proud of presenting this in conjunction with
them and them", we need to simply say "there's a new version, it
fixes/enhances this and that, go download it or read the changelog".
I have tried to incorporate your suggestions into my own proposal, and
the result can be seen at http://httpd.apache.pw/index2
In addition, I have some comments about your design proposal:
- The apache.org design might be changing RSN (it's being discussed),
so using it might not be the most optimal route.
- Using the apache.org design will require making a ton of new pages,
as the menu is not as complex as the original design or my proposal.
- Where are the download/changelog links? We need to push that, not
hide it away.
- The user guide/tips is a great idea on paper, but would require yet
more new documents, which won't be done until November (at ApacheCon).
perhaps we could just add those to the carousel?
- Adding a search bar is always fun to do, but we don't have the tech
to implement a search as it is, unless we use Google (which people can
just use themselves)
- You use JavaScript to display the tabs. This, apparently, needs to be
done in a way that people without JS can view it as well. I have tried
to accommodate that in my second proposal (see link above).
- The documentation link just leads to our boring and unattractive docs
front page. I would prefer if people can go directly to documentation
for e.g. 2.4 right away from the front page (dropdowns?).
I see this discussion going two ways now:
1) Which overall layout should we pick for the site?
2) How do we present out project on the front page?
I think both proposals are valid, and I won't go into "who's got the
prettiest design", as that's entirely personal opinions, but I think the
second proposal leaves people wondering "where can I get it, and where
can I find the changelog/docs/release notes quickly". Not that there
aren't links to some of it, it's just not that obvious where to click.
I'm running out of keyboard here, so I'll pause for a while and think
some more on the subject.
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
>
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net>.
On 16 Jun 2014, at 22:23, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>> Apache httpd being #1 on the internet is great news, but personally I'd put that on the carousel. What sort of leading text should go in its place? I'm happy to put some work into this.
>
> Also, it's the text that's been on our website for at least 15 years. So, yeah, it's probably time to say something different here.
…or say it differently? I've made my own mock up front page (attached), which can be a straw man for further discussion. I based this, as you may well have guessed, on the design and styles used at http://www.apache.org/
This mockup mentions the #1 position and the 1 years but in its own way.
--
Tim Bannister – isoma@jellybaby.net
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 06/16/2014 04:08 PM, Tim Bannister wrote:
> On 16 Jun 2014, at 09:54, Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> wrote:
>
> For httpd releases, here's what I think people want to know:
> • is it a security release
> – if so, I'd like to know CVE numbers (links?) and a rough idea of impact
> • when did the release come out?
> • what are the headline changes?
> • which distributions have already packaged this release?
> • what was the previous release and where can I see the same information for that (maybe I'm late with my updates)?
>
> I think the bit about packaging is important. Not to developers, sure, but for many users it's worth pointing out that you typically won't need to download the code from ASF servers at all. I'd argue that's better for security because most distributions check signatures automatically, and I know that I for one often skip this when building from source.
I think this might be something for the docs, and indeed is something
I'm working on at the moment. Our "getting started"docs are geared
towards people that build from source, and I believe that hardly anybody
does that any more. (and all of you who pipe up and say "I do" just
prove that you're part of the exception, because you're on this list.)
>
> I haven't mentioned the formal announcement, nor the ChangeLog, nor the link to documentation. These are important but I think all those, plus the download link, could be one click further in, on a page about the particular httpd 2.x.x release that the visitor is interested in. Superseded releases should have a clear link to the latest release for that branch.
>
>
> Does that sound like it's on the right lines? I know it's a big change but the main page has to work for its constituency.
>
> ====
>
> Some other points:
>
> I might have a “looking for older releases?” link that explains the status of 1.3 / 2.0 and the recommended alternative. That legacy stuff is still out there.
>
> Apache httpd being #1 on the internet is great news, but personally I'd put that on the carousel. What sort of leading text should go in its place? I'm happy to put some work into this.
Also, it's the text that's been on our website for at least 15 years.
So, yeah, it's probably time to say something different here.
>
>
> ====
> Stuff that's low priority:
>
> • For people using crazy web browsers I would suggest putting the navigation at the end of the page and styling it at the top.
> • The links to sub-projects ought to work without JavaScript (crawlers?)
> • I'd put 2.2 on the left and 2.4 on the right because I usually look at bottom-right for the most recent stuff.
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Tim Bannister <is...@jellybaby.net>.
On 16 Jun 2014, at 09:54, Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> wrote:
> On 06/16/2014 10:33 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> I find the carousel to be unhelpful. Left? Right? Is there an ordering? Where is the info I need? I actually clicked the arrows several times until I realized there were just three bits of info. It is just too difficult to "see at a glance". Carousels like that (IMO) are best for non-"task" information. If I arrive and am seeking information, then put it directly on the page for me to find quickly.
>>
>> It is only three boxes of information. The look of the (carousel) box is nice. Put three of those vertically on the page, and I'd say you're good.
>>
> I'll give it a try - might take a while to get there, but I'll try :) I still would like to use a carousel for other things, perhaps we could start adding some blog posts or tips'n'tricks and use it for that?
>
> Part of what makes me like carousels is that they bring some life to a page, and our front page, as it is right now, desperately needs some life. But I also ack that people don't like to have the news in a carousel, so I'll try adding the news in a bit more traditional fashion, and then we'll see if we can't use the carousel a bit lower on the page,but with some 'alternative reading' suggestions.
For httpd releases, here's what I think people want to know:
• is it a security release
– if so, I'd like to know CVE numbers (links?) and a rough idea of impact
• when did the release come out?
• what are the headline changes?
• which distributions have already packaged this release?
• what was the previous release and where can I see the same information for that (maybe I'm late with my updates)?
I think the bit about packaging is important. Not to developers, sure, but for many users it's worth pointing out that you typically won't need to download the code from ASF servers at all. I'd argue that's better for security because most distributions check signatures automatically, and I know that I for one often skip this when building from source.
I haven't mentioned the formal announcement, nor the ChangeLog, nor the link to documentation. These are important but I think all those, plus the download link, could be one click further in, on a page about the particular httpd 2.x.x release that the visitor is interested in. Superseded releases should have a clear link to the latest release for that branch.
Does that sound like it's on the right lines? I know it's a big change but the main page has to work for its constituency.
====
Some other points:
I might have a “looking for older releases?” link that explains the status of 1.3 / 2.0 and the recommended alternative. That legacy stuff is still out there.
Apache httpd being #1 on the internet is great news, but personally I'd put that on the carousel. What sort of leading text should go in its place? I'm happy to put some work into this.
====
Stuff that's low priority:
• For people using crazy web browsers I would suggest putting the navigation at the end of the page and styling it at the top.
• The links to sub-projects ought to work without JavaScript (crawlers?)
• I'd put 2.2 on the left and 2.4 on the right because I usually look at bottom-right for the most recent stuff.
--
Tim Bannister – isoma@jellybaby.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> wrote:
> On 06/16/2014 10:33 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> > I find the carousel to be unhelpful. Left? Right? Is there an ordering?
> > Where is the info I need? I actually clicked the arrows several times
> > until I realized there were just three bits of info. It is just too
> > difficult to "see at a glance". Carousels like that (IMO) are best for
> > non-"task" information. If I arrive and am seeking information, then put
> > it directly on the page for me to find quickly.
> >
> > It is only three boxes of information. The look of the (carousel) box is
> > nice. Put three of those vertically on the page, and I'd say you're good.
> >
> I'll give it a try - might take a while to get there, but I'll try :)
> I still would like to use a carousel for other things, perhaps we could
> start adding some blog posts or tips'n'tricks and use it for that?
>
There ya go! ... things that aren't part of my task-at-hand ("why did I
come here? what am I looking for?"). A carousel hides that. But...
supplemental stuff.. sure.
Or to rephrase: I have landed at the page with a goal in mind. How fast can
the page satisfy my need? A carousel holding *my* needed information cannot.
But yes: it does liven up the page, and it can certainly provide some info
that I may have not thought about, or been seeking.
Thanks,
-g
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 06/16/2014 10:33 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> I find the carousel to be unhelpful. Left? Right? Is there an ordering?
> Where is the info I need? I actually clicked the arrows several times
> until I realized there were just three bits of info. It is just too
> difficult to "see at a glance". Carousels like that (IMO) are best for
> non-"task" information. If I arrive and am seeking information, then put
> it directly on the page for me to find quickly.
>
> It is only three boxes of information. The look of the (carousel) box is
> nice. Put three of those vertically on the page, and I'd say you're good.
>
I'll give it a try - might take a while to get there, but I'll try :)
I still would like to use a carousel for other things, perhaps we could
start adding some blog posts or tips'n'tricks and use it for that?
Part of what makes me like carousels is that they bring some life to a
page, and our front page, as it is right now, desperately needs some
life. But I also ack that people don't like to have the news in a
carousel, so I'll try adding the news in a bit more traditional fashion,
and then we'll see if we can't use the carousel a bit lower on the page,
but with some 'alternative reading' suggestions.
> Cheers,
> -g
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Daniel Gruno <rumble@cord.dk
> <ma...@cord.dk>> wrote:
>
> Hi there, dev@ people (and docs@ cc'ed),
>
> For some time now, a lot of us from the documentation team have been
> pondering on making our site, well, not so 1990s looking and
> unappealing.
>
> We've had some input from various people over time, and together with my
> own thoughts, I've come up with a new core template that I plan to
> submit to our CMS system if there aren't too many objections.
>
> A mockup front-page featuring this new design can be seen at
> http://httpd.apache.pw/ (please don't start browsing the entire site, IT
> DOES NOT WORK, it needs to be behind our CMS system to be pretty and
> useable).
>
> And yes, this new layout will feature some changes:
>
> - News are placed in a carousel to eliminate the 'wall of text' we
> currently have. RMs will have to get acquainted with how to change the
> news on the site (which shouldn't be difficult if you look at the source
> code, you will still be able to use the CMS to edit it)
> - The menu is now a top bar instead of a side bar
> - Some menu items have been grouped together differently than before
> - The 8 bit feather has been replaced with the 32 bit one.
> - It's not quite as...blue
>
> Now, before half the team starts complaining that this uses HTML5,
> JavaScript or CSS3, please bear in mind that *we are not the intended
> audience*. This is not - and should not be - about what we want, it's
> about what modern (non-lynx) users will find attractive or off-putting
> about a site.
>
> So, I will leave it to you to either love or hate this idea, and if I
> don't hear any (good) arguments against this, I will update the site
> layout in about 72 hours. If, however, someone feels very strongly about
> not changing status quo, I will of course take it to a vote on dev@ (I
> assume docs@ people also follow dev@).
>
> So, throw me some indicative pluses or minuses, or some comments, if you
> care about our site :)
>
> With regards,
> Daniel.
>
>
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I find the carousel to be unhelpful. Left? Right? Is there an ordering?
> Where is the info I need? I actually clicked the arrows several times until
> I realized there were just three bits of info. It is just too difficult to
> "see at a glance". Carousels like that (IMO) are best for non-"task"
> information. If I arrive and am seeking information, then put it directly on
> the page for me to find quickly.
>
> It is only three boxes of information. The look of the (carousel) box is
> nice. Put three of those vertically on the page, and I'd say you're good.
+1, I think "flatter" is better here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 06/16/2014 10:33 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> I find the carousel to be unhelpful. Left? Right? Is there an ordering?
> Where is the info I need? I actually clicked the arrows several times
> until I realized there were just three bits of info. It is just too
> difficult to "see at a glance". Carousels like that (IMO) are best for
> non-"task" information. If I arrive and am seeking information, then put
> it directly on the page for me to find quickly.
>
> It is only three boxes of information. The look of the (carousel) box is
> nice. Put three of those vertically on the page, and I'd say you're good.
>
I'll give it a try - might take a while to get there, but I'll try :)
I still would like to use a carousel for other things, perhaps we could
start adding some blog posts or tips'n'tricks and use it for that?
Part of what makes me like carousels is that they bring some life to a
page, and our front page, as it is right now, desperately needs some
life. But I also ack that people don't like to have the news in a
carousel, so I'll try adding the news in a bit more traditional fashion,
and then we'll see if we can't use the carousel a bit lower on the page,
but with some 'alternative reading' suggestions.
> Cheers,
> -g
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Daniel Gruno <rumble@cord.dk
> <ma...@cord.dk>> wrote:
>
> Hi there, dev@ people (and docs@ cc'ed),
>
> For some time now, a lot of us from the documentation team have been
> pondering on making our site, well, not so 1990s looking and
> unappealing.
>
> We've had some input from various people over time, and together with my
> own thoughts, I've come up with a new core template that I plan to
> submit to our CMS system if there aren't too many objections.
>
> A mockup front-page featuring this new design can be seen at
> http://httpd.apache.pw/ (please don't start browsing the entire site, IT
> DOES NOT WORK, it needs to be behind our CMS system to be pretty and
> useable).
>
> And yes, this new layout will feature some changes:
>
> - News are placed in a carousel to eliminate the 'wall of text' we
> currently have. RMs will have to get acquainted with how to change the
> news on the site (which shouldn't be difficult if you look at the source
> code, you will still be able to use the CMS to edit it)
> - The menu is now a top bar instead of a side bar
> - Some menu items have been grouped together differently than before
> - The 8 bit feather has been replaced with the 32 bit one.
> - It's not quite as...blue
>
> Now, before half the team starts complaining that this uses HTML5,
> JavaScript or CSS3, please bear in mind that *we are not the intended
> audience*. This is not - and should not be - about what we want, it's
> about what modern (non-lynx) users will find attractive or off-putting
> about a site.
>
> So, I will leave it to you to either love or hate this idea, and if I
> don't hear any (good) arguments against this, I will update the site
> layout in about 72 hours. If, however, someone feels very strongly about
> not changing status quo, I will of course take it to a vote on dev@ (I
> assume docs@ people also follow dev@).
>
> So, throw me some indicative pluses or minuses, or some comments, if you
> care about our site :)
>
> With regards,
> Daniel.
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
I find the carousel to be unhelpful. Left? Right? Is there an ordering?
Where is the info I need? I actually clicked the arrows several times until
I realized there were just three bits of info. It is just too difficult to
"see at a glance". Carousels like that (IMO) are best for non-"task"
information. If I arrive and am seeking information, then put it directly
on the page for me to find quickly.
It is only three boxes of information. The look of the (carousel) box is
nice. Put three of those vertically on the page, and I'd say you're good.
Cheers,
-g
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> wrote:
> Hi there, dev@ people (and docs@ cc'ed),
>
> For some time now, a lot of us from the documentation team have been
> pondering on making our site, well, not so 1990s looking and unappealing.
>
> We've had some input from various people over time, and together with my
> own thoughts, I've come up with a new core template that I plan to
> submit to our CMS system if there aren't too many objections.
>
> A mockup front-page featuring this new design can be seen at
> http://httpd.apache.pw/ (please don't start browsing the entire site, IT
> DOES NOT WORK, it needs to be behind our CMS system to be pretty and
> useable).
>
> And yes, this new layout will feature some changes:
>
> - News are placed in a carousel to eliminate the 'wall of text' we
> currently have. RMs will have to get acquainted with how to change the
> news on the site (which shouldn't be difficult if you look at the source
> code, you will still be able to use the CMS to edit it)
> - The menu is now a top bar instead of a side bar
> - Some menu items have been grouped together differently than before
> - The 8 bit feather has been replaced with the 32 bit one.
> - It's not quite as...blue
>
> Now, before half the team starts complaining that this uses HTML5,
> JavaScript or CSS3, please bear in mind that *we are not the intended
> audience*. This is not - and should not be - about what we want, it's
> about what modern (non-lynx) users will find attractive or off-putting
> about a site.
>
> So, I will leave it to you to either love or hate this idea, and if I
> don't hear any (good) arguments against this, I will update the site
> layout in about 72 hours. If, however, someone feels very strongly about
> not changing status quo, I will of course take it to a vote on dev@ (I
> assume docs@ people also follow dev@).
>
> So, throw me some indicative pluses or minuses, or some comments, if you
> care about our site :)
>
> With regards,
> Daniel.
>
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Mike Rumph <mi...@oracle.com>.
Hello Greg,
I agree with your push towards a peaceful and constructive discussion on
this.
Hello Daniel,
I applaud your efforts at introducing a new design to the Apache Http
Server website.
As this is very different (though not radically so) from what was before,
it is very easy to criticize.
A change this big should be allowed time to breathe.
Is there a way that some of these webpage designs (yours, Tim's, etc.)
can be added to a side page of the website for review.
So that the broader Apache HTTP Server community can have some input?
Hello Andre,
I also think all of your criticisms are important for the process.
Each of them should be considered.
Thanks to all,
Mike Rumph
On 6/16/2014 1:38 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:00 AM, André Malo <nd@perlig.de
> <ma...@perlig.de>> wrote:
>
> * Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> ...
>
> I'm finding the back/forth here to be a bit more combative than maybe
> needed. Daniel: you asked for feedback. Andre could maybe be more
> constructive and appreciative of your work, but it *is* what you asked
> for.
>
> Forward movement is good, and I greatly appreciate bringing in
> Bootstrap as a tool for making the site better looking, and more
> layout-responsive. Kudos.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Mike Rumph <mi...@oracle.com>.
Hello Greg,
I agree with your push towards a peaceful and constructive discussion on
this.
Hello Daniel,
I applaud your efforts at introducing a new design to the Apache Http
Server website.
As this is very different (though not radically so) from what was before,
it is very easy to criticize.
A change this big should be allowed time to breathe.
Is there a way that some of these webpage designs (yours, Tim's, etc.)
can be added to a side page of the website for review.
So that the broader Apache HTTP Server community can have some input?
Hello Andre,
I also think all of your criticisms are important for the process.
Each of them should be considered.
Thanks to all,
Mike Rumph
On 6/16/2014 1:38 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:00 AM, André Malo <nd@perlig.de
> <ma...@perlig.de>> wrote:
>
> * Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> ...
>
> I'm finding the back/forth here to be a bit more combative than maybe
> needed. Daniel: you asked for feedback. Andre could maybe be more
> constructive and appreciative of your work, but it *is* what you asked
> for.
>
> Forward movement is good, and I greatly appreciate bringing in
> Bootstrap as a tool for making the site better looking, and more
> layout-responsive. Kudos.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 06/16/2014 10:38 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:00 AM, André Malo <nd@perlig.de
> <ma...@perlig.de>> wrote:
>
> * Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> ...
>
> I'm finding the back/forth here to be a bit more combative than maybe
> needed. Daniel: you asked for feedback. Andre could maybe be more
> constructive and appreciative of your work, but it *is* what you asked for.
I did say I was being terse :) And it was late. Sorry if I sounded too
much like a grumpy cat (or angry pony), it is not my intention to berate
or belittle anyone, but merely to exchange views. Email, like IRC, can
be a terrible purveyor of emotions, things can all to easily be
interpreted as spiteful and combative. I meant no spite or ill intentions.
I want this to be meritocratic and democratic (not utilitarian), in that
we try to compromise so it's the least horrible outcome for as many
people as possible.
>
> Forward movement is good, and I greatly appreciate bringing in Bootstrap
> as a tool for making the site better looking, and more
> layout-responsive. Kudos.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 06/16/2014 10:38 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:00 AM, André Malo <nd@perlig.de
> <ma...@perlig.de>> wrote:
>
> * Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> ...
>
> I'm finding the back/forth here to be a bit more combative than maybe
> needed. Daniel: you asked for feedback. Andre could maybe be more
> constructive and appreciative of your work, but it *is* what you asked for.
I did say I was being terse :) And it was late. Sorry if I sounded too
much like a grumpy cat (or angry pony), it is not my intention to berate
or belittle anyone, but merely to exchange views. Email, like IRC, can
be a terrible purveyor of emotions, things can all to easily be
interpreted as spiteful and combative. I meant no spite or ill intentions.
I want this to be meritocratic and democratic (not utilitarian), in that
we try to compromise so it's the least horrible outcome for as many
people as possible.
>
> Forward movement is good, and I greatly appreciate bringing in Bootstrap
> as a tool for making the site better looking, and more
> layout-responsive. Kudos.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:00 AM, André Malo <nd...@perlig.de> wrote:
> * Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
...
I'm finding the back/forth here to be a bit more combative than maybe
needed. Daniel: you asked for feedback. Andre could maybe be more
constructive and appreciative of your work, but it *is* what you asked for.
Forward movement is good, and I greatly appreciate bringing in Bootstrap as
a tool for making the site better looking, and more layout-responsive.
Kudos.
Cheers,
-g
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 3:00 AM, André Malo <nd...@perlig.de> wrote:
> * Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
...
I'm finding the back/forth here to be a bit more combative than maybe
needed. Daniel: you asked for feedback. Andre could maybe be more
constructive and appreciative of your work, but it *is* what you asked for.
Forward movement is good, and I greatly appreciate bringing in Bootstrap as
a tool for making the site better looking, and more layout-responsive.
Kudos.
Cheers,
-g
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* Daniel Gruno wrote:
> > As a user, I'd like to see relevant information. It must be possible to
> > get the relevant information without javascript (yes!) and without
> > random clicking (what should I expect from a non-descriptive arrow-link
> > which feels like an adverstisement?).
>
> I disagree with the use of the word 'must' here, 'should' is a much
> nicer word to use when one has only personal preference behind ones
> css+noscript combo (identical comment further down, I write in reverse).
A page, where content is not reachable (also for search indexers), is
useless. If you like "should" better, fine. We should not build such a
thing.
I have similar problems (and I'm not the only one) with the recent
python.org relaunch.
We have to try to be helpful, not fancy in the first place.
>
> > Which means, all maintained releases should be visible at once. That
> > has nothing to do with Apache, that's a simple observation, how people
> > look on software pages.
>
> A counter-observation is that a big wall of text, where everything looks
> the same, isn't preferable either.
Nobody says, that everything has to look the same. And that the whole text
blob should be visible at once. But a release overview (Two current
branches are not that much) would be fine.
> I have tried to counter that, but I
> will gladly accept any proposals to add all the (non-EOL) releases to
> some form of matrix on the front page. I'm just not sure how to tackle
> it yet.
2.0 is EOL. So it's basically two boxes or something.
>
> > And yes, as an admin I may have only a text browser available if I want
> > to check the current security state of a software *on my server*. Shit
> > happens.
>
> Good thing this proposal works perfectly well with Lynx then.
I don't use lynx ;)
>
> > Anyway, here are some more comments based on a *quick* review. I find
> > the 72h timebox way too short for such a change, by the way, especially
> > over a weekend.
>
> It's not _over a weekend_, and I'm not trying to sneak in a change this
> big. If I wanted that, I would've JFDI'ed it and taken the flak. But I
> also don't want yet another 17(!) years of saying "hmm we should do
> something" and then not doing anything because we're too busy staring at
> our own navels.
Sorry for that, I messed up the days (it was shortly after midnight here).
> I asked that anyone object if they found something wrong
> with a 72h lazy consensus, and you have objected, and I will naturally
> take that into account.
Fine. I think, it's wrong.
> We have a web site that screams "we don't care anymore!", and that makes
> me an angry pony. And sometimes angry ponies use lazy consensus because
> it seems like we are only a handful of people who really care enough. I
> am glad that you care, that makes another one of us.
>
> > (also a screenshot: <http://people.apache.org/~nd/shot.png>)
>
> That's a matter of tweaking the CSS, although I hadn't imagined anyone
> visiting with less than 720p these days, so I hadn't tried what would
> happen if someone did. I will correct the styles to also work with very
> narrow screens.
Huh. The browser was 1016 pixels wide. So is the screenshot... How is that
narrow and less than 720p?
>
> > - Don't fix the fonts to px size.
> > - The maint font (Libertine) is badly readable.
>
> I disagree, but we can probably find a font more suitable (or settle for
> Serif if all else fails)
So, you find it well-readable? Try reading the text in the screenshot.
> > Also, the legal stuff should be reachable without Javascript anyway.
>
> As stated earlier, I find that to be a very...vague argument.
You might want to have a look at laws of certain countries (Germany is an
example). Although they don't apply directly, mirroring might be an issue.
> Other than
> actively choosing to disable JavaScript while retaining CSS styles, you
> won't find yourself in a situation where you can't use the navigation
> properly.
Which is the typical case (using noscript), though. It's easily possible to
build it working that way. If bootstrap can't do that, we have to give it a
boot.
(no pun intended)
>
> > - Once I activated JS, I immediatetly found the carousel autoscrolling
> > annoying (the animation too, because it steals my time, but YMMV).
>
> That can be adjusted/disabled. I have changed it to 15 seconds per
> frame, up from 10 sec/frame. I'm interested in hearing what others think
> of this.
Yes, my answer was to all. I've just stated my thinkings here.
>
> > - A final version should remove external dependencies and all inline
> > style attributes. Also, unscoped style blocks within the body are
> > invalid HTML.
>
> Yes, I have that on my To-do list. I was initially more interested in
> comments on the overall look and feel, and not so much whether it's
> valid HTML - those things can always be fixed, and any modern browser
> will work with it in any case.
Such an early state should not go to the CMS then.
>
> > - Btw: There are many !important styles. Why is that?
>
> It's an easy way to override other style settings one disagrees with in
> Bootstrap.
So simple cascading doesn't work with bootstrap?
So, to sum up, I like it, that you take care of our site. If you check it
into the repository somewhere, I'm willing to help.
nd
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
* Daniel Gruno wrote:
> > As a user, I'd like to see relevant information. It must be possible to
> > get the relevant information without javascript (yes!) and without
> > random clicking (what should I expect from a non-descriptive arrow-link
> > which feels like an adverstisement?).
>
> I disagree with the use of the word 'must' here, 'should' is a much
> nicer word to use when one has only personal preference behind ones
> css+noscript combo (identical comment further down, I write in reverse).
A page, where content is not reachable (also for search indexers), is
useless. If you like "should" better, fine. We should not build such a
thing.
I have similar problems (and I'm not the only one) with the recent
python.org relaunch.
We have to try to be helpful, not fancy in the first place.
>
> > Which means, all maintained releases should be visible at once. That
> > has nothing to do with Apache, that's a simple observation, how people
> > look on software pages.
>
> A counter-observation is that a big wall of text, where everything looks
> the same, isn't preferable either.
Nobody says, that everything has to look the same. And that the whole text
blob should be visible at once. But a release overview (Two current
branches are not that much) would be fine.
> I have tried to counter that, but I
> will gladly accept any proposals to add all the (non-EOL) releases to
> some form of matrix on the front page. I'm just not sure how to tackle
> it yet.
2.0 is EOL. So it's basically two boxes or something.
>
> > And yes, as an admin I may have only a text browser available if I want
> > to check the current security state of a software *on my server*. Shit
> > happens.
>
> Good thing this proposal works perfectly well with Lynx then.
I don't use lynx ;)
>
> > Anyway, here are some more comments based on a *quick* review. I find
> > the 72h timebox way too short for such a change, by the way, especially
> > over a weekend.
>
> It's not _over a weekend_, and I'm not trying to sneak in a change this
> big. If I wanted that, I would've JFDI'ed it and taken the flak. But I
> also don't want yet another 17(!) years of saying "hmm we should do
> something" and then not doing anything because we're too busy staring at
> our own navels.
Sorry for that, I messed up the days (it was shortly after midnight here).
> I asked that anyone object if they found something wrong
> with a 72h lazy consensus, and you have objected, and I will naturally
> take that into account.
Fine. I think, it's wrong.
> We have a web site that screams "we don't care anymore!", and that makes
> me an angry pony. And sometimes angry ponies use lazy consensus because
> it seems like we are only a handful of people who really care enough. I
> am glad that you care, that makes another one of us.
>
> > (also a screenshot: <http://people.apache.org/~nd/shot.png>)
>
> That's a matter of tweaking the CSS, although I hadn't imagined anyone
> visiting with less than 720p these days, so I hadn't tried what would
> happen if someone did. I will correct the styles to also work with very
> narrow screens.
Huh. The browser was 1016 pixels wide. So is the screenshot... How is that
narrow and less than 720p?
>
> > - Don't fix the fonts to px size.
> > - The maint font (Libertine) is badly readable.
>
> I disagree, but we can probably find a font more suitable (or settle for
> Serif if all else fails)
So, you find it well-readable? Try reading the text in the screenshot.
> > Also, the legal stuff should be reachable without Javascript anyway.
>
> As stated earlier, I find that to be a very...vague argument.
You might want to have a look at laws of certain countries (Germany is an
example). Although they don't apply directly, mirroring might be an issue.
> Other than
> actively choosing to disable JavaScript while retaining CSS styles, you
> won't find yourself in a situation where you can't use the navigation
> properly.
Which is the typical case (using noscript), though. It's easily possible to
build it working that way. If bootstrap can't do that, we have to give it a
boot.
(no pun intended)
>
> > - Once I activated JS, I immediatetly found the carousel autoscrolling
> > annoying (the animation too, because it steals my time, but YMMV).
>
> That can be adjusted/disabled. I have changed it to 15 seconds per
> frame, up from 10 sec/frame. I'm interested in hearing what others think
> of this.
Yes, my answer was to all. I've just stated my thinkings here.
>
> > - A final version should remove external dependencies and all inline
> > style attributes. Also, unscoped style blocks within the body are
> > invalid HTML.
>
> Yes, I have that on my To-do list. I was initially more interested in
> comments on the overall look and feel, and not so much whether it's
> valid HTML - those things can always be fixed, and any modern browser
> will work with it in any case.
Such an early state should not go to the CMS then.
>
> > - Btw: There are many !important styles. Why is that?
>
> It's an easy way to override other style settings one disagrees with in
> Bootstrap.
So simple cascading doesn't work with bootstrap?
So, to sum up, I like it, that you take care of our site. If you check it
into the repository somewhere, I'm willing to help.
nd
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
[Disclaimer: I am being terse. It is late here. Or early, as it were.]
On 06/16/2014 01:44 AM, André Malo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> * Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
>> Hi there, dev@ people (and docs@ cc'ed),
>>
>> For some time now, a lot of us from the documentation team have been
>> pondering on making our site, well, not so 1990s looking and unappealing.
>
> +1 at the point.
>
>>
>> We've had some input from various people over time, and together with my
>> own thoughts, I've come up with a new core template that I plan to
>> submit to our CMS system if there aren't too many objections.
>>
>> A mockup front-page featuring this new design can be seen at
>> http://httpd.apache.pw/ (please don't start browsing the entire site, IT
>> DOES NOT WORK, it needs to be behind our CMS system to be pretty and
>> useable).
>>
>> And yes, this new layout will feature some changes:
>>
>> - News are placed in a carousel to eliminate the 'wall of text' we
>> currently have. RMs will have to get acquainted with how to change the
>> news on the site (which shouldn't be difficult if you look at the source
>> code, you will still be able to use the CMS to edit it)
>> - The menu is now a top bar instead of a side bar
>> - Some menu items have been grouped together differently than before
>> - The 8 bit feather has been replaced with the 32 bit one.
>> - It's not quite as...blue
>>
>> Now, before half the team starts complaining that this uses HTML5,
>> JavaScript or CSS3, please bear in mind that *we are not the intended
>> audience*. This is not - and should not be - about what we want, it's
>> about what modern (non-lynx) users will find attractive or off-putting
>> about a site.
>
> That's a killer phrase. User typically find a site attractive, if they find
> their use cases served (properly). If it looks nice, the better, of course.
> If it wastes her time looking attractive, but not being helpful, it's just
> making her angry.
>
> As a user, I'd like to see relevant information. It must be possible to get
> the relevant information without javascript (yes!) and without random
> clicking (what should I expect from a non-descriptive arrow-link which
> feels like an adverstisement?).
I disagree with the use of the word 'must' here, 'should' is a much
nicer word to use when one has only personal preference behind ones
css+noscript combo (identical comment further down, I write in reverse).
> Which means, all maintained releases should be visible at once. That has
> nothing to do with Apache, that's a simple observation, how people look on
> software pages.
A counter-observation is that a big wall of text, where everything looks
the same, isn't preferable either. I have tried to counter that, but I
will gladly accept any proposals to add all the (non-EOL) releases to
some form of matrix on the front page. I'm just not sure how to tackle
it yet.
>
> And yes, as an admin I may have only a text browser available if I want to
> check the current security state of a software *on my server*. Shit
> happens.
Good thing this proposal works perfectly well with Lynx then.
>
> Anyway, here are some more comments based on a *quick* review. I find the
> 72h timebox way too short for such a change, by the way, especially over a
> weekend.
It's not _over a weekend_, and I'm not trying to sneak in a change this
big. If I wanted that, I would've JFDI'ed it and taken the flak. But I
also don't want yet another 17(!) years of saying "hmm we should do
something" and then not doing anything because we're too busy staring at
our own navels. I asked that anyone object if they found something wrong
with a 72h lazy consensus, and you have objected, and I will naturally
take that into account.
We have a web site that screams "we don't care anymore!", and that makes
me an angry pony. And sometimes angry ponies use lazy consensus because
it seems like we are only a handful of people who really care enough. I
am glad that you care, that makes another one of us.
>
> (also a screenshot: <http://people.apache.org/~nd/shot.png>)
That's a matter of tweaking the CSS, although I hadn't imagined anyone
visiting with less than 720p these days, so I hadn't tried what would
happen if someone did. I will correct the styles to also work with very
narrow screens.
>
> - Don't fix the fonts to px size.
> - The maint font (Libertine) is badly readable.
I disagree, but we can probably find a font more suitable (or settle for
Serif if all else fails)
> - the tagline is weirdly placed (see screenshot, made with a current
> firefox)
Due to the above issue with a very narrow screen.
I have now opted to not fix the top bar to the screen, thus avoiding this.
> - The carousel padding seems strange, too
> - also, it's italic, that looks, like, 80s, sorry (as in: Text processing
> software on my good old Atari ST :-)
There was one line of italic, just the one. It is now gone.
> - (Maybe the points above are due to freetype, but that's how it is.
>
> - As said, all the technologies are fine, just make sure, it's usable
> without it. An implementation could be to add real links to the dropdown
> headings pointing to pages listing the submenus).
Done.
>
> Also, the legal stuff should be reachable without Javascript anyway.
As stated earlier, I find that to be a very...vague argument. Other than
actively choosing to disable JavaScript while retaining CSS styles, you
won't find yourself in a situation where you can't use the navigation
properly.
>
> - Once I activated JS, I immediatetly found the carousel autoscrolling
> annoying (the animation too, because it steals my time, but YMMV).
That can be adjusted/disabled. I have changed it to 15 seconds per
frame, up from 10 sec/frame. I'm interested in hearing what others think
of this.
> - A final version should remove external dependencies and all inline style
> attributes. Also, unscoped style blocks within the body are invalid HTML.
Yes, I have that on my To-do list. I was initially more interested in
comments on the overall look and feel, and not so much whether it's
valid HTML - those things can always be fixed, and any modern browser
will work with it in any case.
> - Btw: There are many !important styles. Why is that?
It's an easy way to override other style settings one disagrees with in
Bootstrap.
>
> - The align attribute for the img element is deprecated in HTML5
> - Empty elements have bad semantics: <b class="caret"></b>. I know, it's a
> neat CSS trick, but that doesn't make it better. A background image would
> be a better choice here.
> - <span class="glyphicon glyphicon-chevron-right"></span> is similar. Just
> put the font character inside the link and set the font properly. However,
> not everybody executes remote font files (I usually don't by default).
> These people see strange letters instead of carousel arrows.
>
> There are a few tricks involving putting real arrow characters inside
> another container and adding font defining classes / display: none for the
> arrow after a modernizr-like detection for font-face support.
> Or just use SVG images as link content.
>
> I did not dig deeper so far, as said, that was a quick view.
>
> -1 at the implementation, sorry.
>
> nd
>
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
Hi,
* Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Hi there, dev@ people (and docs@ cc'ed),
>
> For some time now, a lot of us from the documentation team have been
> pondering on making our site, well, not so 1990s looking and unappealing.
+1 at the point.
>
> We've had some input from various people over time, and together with my
> own thoughts, I've come up with a new core template that I plan to
> submit to our CMS system if there aren't too many objections.
>
> A mockup front-page featuring this new design can be seen at
> http://httpd.apache.pw/ (please don't start browsing the entire site, IT
> DOES NOT WORK, it needs to be behind our CMS system to be pretty and
> useable).
>
> And yes, this new layout will feature some changes:
>
> - News are placed in a carousel to eliminate the 'wall of text' we
> currently have. RMs will have to get acquainted with how to change the
> news on the site (which shouldn't be difficult if you look at the source
> code, you will still be able to use the CMS to edit it)
> - The menu is now a top bar instead of a side bar
> - Some menu items have been grouped together differently than before
> - The 8 bit feather has been replaced with the 32 bit one.
> - It's not quite as...blue
>
> Now, before half the team starts complaining that this uses HTML5,
> JavaScript or CSS3, please bear in mind that *we are not the intended
> audience*. This is not - and should not be - about what we want, it's
> about what modern (non-lynx) users will find attractive or off-putting
> about a site.
That's a killer phrase. User typically find a site attractive, if they find
their use cases served (properly). If it looks nice, the better, of course.
If it wastes her time looking attractive, but not being helpful, it's just
making her angry.
As a user, I'd like to see relevant information. It must be possible to get
the relevant information without javascript (yes!) and without random
clicking (what should I expect from a non-descriptive arrow-link which
feels like an adverstisement?).
Which means, all maintained releases should be visible at once. That has
nothing to do with Apache, that's a simple observation, how people look on
software pages.
And yes, as an admin I may have only a text browser available if I want to
check the current security state of a software *on my server*. Shit
happens.
Anyway, here are some more comments based on a *quick* review. I find the
72h timebox way too short for such a change, by the way, especially over a
weekend.
(also a screenshot: <http://people.apache.org/~nd/shot.png>)
- Don't fix the fonts to px size.
- The maint font (Libertine) is badly readable.
- the tagline is weirdly placed (see screenshot, made with a current
firefox)
- The carousel padding seems strange, too
- also, it's italic, that looks, like, 80s, sorry (as in: Text processing
software on my good old Atari ST :-)
- (Maybe the points above are due to freetype, but that's how it is.
- As said, all the technologies are fine, just make sure, it's usable
without it. An implementation could be to add real links to the dropdown
headings pointing to pages listing the submenus).
Also, the legal stuff should be reachable without Javascript anyway.
- Once I activated JS, I immediatetly found the carousel autoscrolling
annoying (the animation too, because it steals my time, but YMMV).
- A final version should remove external dependencies and all inline style
attributes. Also, unscoped style blocks within the body are invalid HTML.
- Btw: There are many !important styles. Why is that?
- The align attribute for the img element is deprecated in HTML5
- Empty elements have bad semantics: <b class="caret"></b>. I know, it's a
neat CSS trick, but that doesn't make it better. A background image would
be a better choice here.
- <span class="glyphicon glyphicon-chevron-right"></span> is similar. Just
put the font character inside the link and set the font properly. However,
not everybody executes remote font files (I usually don't by default).
These people see strange letters instead of carousel arrows.
There are a few tricks involving putting real arrow characters inside
another container and adding font defining classes / display: none for the
arrow after a modernizr-like detection for font-face support.
Or just use SVG images as link content.
I did not dig deeper so far, as said, that was a quick view.
-1 at the implementation, sorry.
nd
--
Das einzige, das einen Gebäudekollaps (oder auch einen
thermonuklearen Krieg) unbeschadet übersteht, sind Kakerlaken
und AOL-CDs.
-- Bastian Lipp in dcsm
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
+1,000,000
On 06/15/2014 04:55 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Hi there, dev@ people (and docs@ cc'ed),
>
> For some time now, a lot of us from the documentation team have been
> pondering on making our site, well, not so 1990s looking and unappealing.
>
> We've had some input from various people over time, and together with my
> own thoughts, I've come up with a new core template that I plan to
> submit to our CMS system if there aren't too many objections.
>
> A mockup front-page featuring this new design can be seen at
> http://httpd.apache.pw/ (please don't start browsing the entire site, IT
> DOES NOT WORK, it needs to be behind our CMS system to be pretty and
> useable).
>
> And yes, this new layout will feature some changes:
>
> - News are placed in a carousel to eliminate the 'wall of text' we
> currently have. RMs will have to get acquainted with how to change the
> news on the site (which shouldn't be difficult if you look at the source
> code, you will still be able to use the CMS to edit it)
> - The menu is now a top bar instead of a side bar
> - Some menu items have been grouped together differently than before
> - The 8 bit feather has been replaced with the 32 bit one.
> - It's not quite as...blue
>
> Now, before half the team starts complaining that this uses HTML5,
> JavaScript or CSS3, please bear in mind that *we are not the intended
> audience*. This is not - and should not be - about what we want, it's
> about what modern (non-lynx) users will find attractive or off-putting
> about a site.
>
> So, I will leave it to you to either love or hate this idea, and if I
> don't hear any (good) arguments against this, I will update the site
> layout in about 72 hours. If, however, someone feels very strongly about
> not changing status quo, I will of course take it to a vote on dev@ (I
> assume docs@ people also follow dev@).
>
> So, throw me some indicative pluses or minuses, or some comments, if you
> care about our site :)
>
> With regards,
> Daniel.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-help@httpd.apache.org
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by André Malo <nd...@perlig.de>.
Hi,
* Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Hi there, dev@ people (and docs@ cc'ed),
>
> For some time now, a lot of us from the documentation team have been
> pondering on making our site, well, not so 1990s looking and unappealing.
+1 at the point.
>
> We've had some input from various people over time, and together with my
> own thoughts, I've come up with a new core template that I plan to
> submit to our CMS system if there aren't too many objections.
>
> A mockup front-page featuring this new design can be seen at
> http://httpd.apache.pw/ (please don't start browsing the entire site, IT
> DOES NOT WORK, it needs to be behind our CMS system to be pretty and
> useable).
>
> And yes, this new layout will feature some changes:
>
> - News are placed in a carousel to eliminate the 'wall of text' we
> currently have. RMs will have to get acquainted with how to change the
> news on the site (which shouldn't be difficult if you look at the source
> code, you will still be able to use the CMS to edit it)
> - The menu is now a top bar instead of a side bar
> - Some menu items have been grouped together differently than before
> - The 8 bit feather has been replaced with the 32 bit one.
> - It's not quite as...blue
>
> Now, before half the team starts complaining that this uses HTML5,
> JavaScript or CSS3, please bear in mind that *we are not the intended
> audience*. This is not - and should not be - about what we want, it's
> about what modern (non-lynx) users will find attractive or off-putting
> about a site.
That's a killer phrase. User typically find a site attractive, if they find
their use cases served (properly). If it looks nice, the better, of course.
If it wastes her time looking attractive, but not being helpful, it's just
making her angry.
As a user, I'd like to see relevant information. It must be possible to get
the relevant information without javascript (yes!) and without random
clicking (what should I expect from a non-descriptive arrow-link which
feels like an adverstisement?).
Which means, all maintained releases should be visible at once. That has
nothing to do with Apache, that's a simple observation, how people look on
software pages.
And yes, as an admin I may have only a text browser available if I want to
check the current security state of a software *on my server*. Shit
happens.
Anyway, here are some more comments based on a *quick* review. I find the
72h timebox way too short for such a change, by the way, especially over a
weekend.
(also a screenshot: <http://people.apache.org/~nd/shot.png>)
- Don't fix the fonts to px size.
- The maint font (Libertine) is badly readable.
- the tagline is weirdly placed (see screenshot, made with a current
firefox)
- The carousel padding seems strange, too
- also, it's italic, that looks, like, 80s, sorry (as in: Text processing
software on my good old Atari ST :-)
- (Maybe the points above are due to freetype, but that's how it is.
- As said, all the technologies are fine, just make sure, it's usable
without it. An implementation could be to add real links to the dropdown
headings pointing to pages listing the submenus).
Also, the legal stuff should be reachable without Javascript anyway.
- Once I activated JS, I immediatetly found the carousel autoscrolling
annoying (the animation too, because it steals my time, but YMMV).
- A final version should remove external dependencies and all inline style
attributes. Also, unscoped style blocks within the body are invalid HTML.
- Btw: There are many !important styles. Why is that?
- The align attribute for the img element is deprecated in HTML5
- Empty elements have bad semantics: <b class="caret"></b>. I know, it's a
neat CSS trick, but that doesn't make it better. A background image would
be a better choice here.
- <span class="glyphicon glyphicon-chevron-right"></span> is similar. Just
put the font character inside the link and set the font properly. However,
not everybody executes remote font files (I usually don't by default).
These people see strange letters instead of carousel arrows.
There are a few tricks involving putting real arrow characters inside
another container and adding font defining classes / display: none for the
arrow after a modernizr-like detection for font-face support.
Or just use SVG images as link content.
I did not dig deeper so far, as said, that was a quick view.
-1 at the implementation, sorry.
nd
--
Das einzige, das einen Gebäudekollaps (oder auch einen
thermonuklearen Krieg) unbeschadet übersteht, sind Kakerlaken
und AOL-CDs.
-- Bastian Lipp in dcsm
Re: Change of web site layout
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
I find the carousel to be unhelpful. Left? Right? Is there an ordering?
Where is the info I need? I actually clicked the arrows several times until
I realized there were just three bits of info. It is just too difficult to
"see at a glance". Carousels like that (IMO) are best for non-"task"
information. If I arrive and am seeking information, then put it directly
on the page for me to find quickly.
It is only three boxes of information. The look of the (carousel) box is
nice. Put three of those vertically on the page, and I'd say you're good.
Cheers,
-g
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk> wrote:
> Hi there, dev@ people (and docs@ cc'ed),
>
> For some time now, a lot of us from the documentation team have been
> pondering on making our site, well, not so 1990s looking and unappealing.
>
> We've had some input from various people over time, and together with my
> own thoughts, I've come up with a new core template that I plan to
> submit to our CMS system if there aren't too many objections.
>
> A mockup front-page featuring this new design can be seen at
> http://httpd.apache.pw/ (please don't start browsing the entire site, IT
> DOES NOT WORK, it needs to be behind our CMS system to be pretty and
> useable).
>
> And yes, this new layout will feature some changes:
>
> - News are placed in a carousel to eliminate the 'wall of text' we
> currently have. RMs will have to get acquainted with how to change the
> news on the site (which shouldn't be difficult if you look at the source
> code, you will still be able to use the CMS to edit it)
> - The menu is now a top bar instead of a side bar
> - Some menu items have been grouped together differently than before
> - The 8 bit feather has been replaced with the 32 bit one.
> - It's not quite as...blue
>
> Now, before half the team starts complaining that this uses HTML5,
> JavaScript or CSS3, please bear in mind that *we are not the intended
> audience*. This is not - and should not be - about what we want, it's
> about what modern (non-lynx) users will find attractive or off-putting
> about a site.
>
> So, I will leave it to you to either love or hate this idea, and if I
> don't hear any (good) arguments against this, I will update the site
> layout in about 72 hours. If, however, someone feels very strongly about
> not changing status quo, I will of course take it to a vote on dev@ (I
> assume docs@ people also follow dev@).
>
> So, throw me some indicative pluses or minuses, or some comments, if you
> care about our site :)
>
> With regards,
> Daniel.
>