You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to docs-dev@perl.apache.org by Bill Moseley <mo...@hank.org> on 2002/04/19 01:41:12 UTC
Argh! (was Re: Search box at top)
Argh = not getting anywhere. And I have to leave for the evening.
Ok, I just spent an hour on the phone with a designer friend. What he
convinced me of is that Allan and I were really in agreement. Read on.
He does not like the navigation on the left of the content area, nor does
he like the search box on the left of the content area. (He doesn't like
anything on the left.) The reason is flow: the eye goes to the title, then
goes to what's next, and in either case (navigation left or search left) is
what's next, instead of the text.
That's exactly the reason I put the search box on the right, and navigation
left, but then and removed the lines around the navigation buttons. I was
trying to make the navigation less powerful. Have my cake and eat it too,
if you will.
Here's that again: http://hank.org:5000/test1/docs/index.html
But that's still not enough. Even the light-weight navigation on the left
side is in the way to some degree. No getting around that.
Again, the main idea is to make the content flow, from the title to the text.
We tried moving the navigation and search above the title bar. Didn't work.
Tried placing search above the title on the right, and the nav below title
on the right. Didn't work, as the right side was way too heavy.
He suggested since the navigation is related to the current page that the
navigation could be *in* the title bar on the right side. But our titles
are too long, so the title and nav won't fit on the same line.
My he suggested moving the search to the left-hand sidebar. ("Argh, that's
where it just came from", I said.)
In short: We felt that this was the best design:
http://hank.org:5000/test3/docs/index.html
because there was the least amount of stuff blocking the path between the
title bar and the content.
Here's the closest to the latest design - the navigation widgets
bigger/outlined.
http://hank.org:5000/test2/docs/index.html
If the search box goes on the top then we both liked:
http://hank.org:5000/test1/docs/index.html
(but with a better "go" button.)
because the small < prev up next > widgets were least distracting. I was
more in support of the top search than my friend, but this is what he
picked if it had to be there.
Otherwise, I agree with Allan that stuff on the left side of the content
section is overwhelming.
Can people take a peek at those three and give their opinions? I know this
is repeating, sorry.
His other comments, if I can remember. All minor, of course. No need for
us to discuss them, but I wanted to pass them on.
- The "mod" part of the logo is a cool gray which blends in with the site.
He suggested if that was more of a dirty red (burgundy?) that the logo
would stand out. He asked one of his photoshop guys to mock up an example.
I doubt anyone is willing to change, since it was voted on, but it might
be fun to see. I'll post an example when I get it. He also asked why it
was mod_perl in the content and modperl in the logo.....
- He kept commenting on content, which I kept reminding him that more was
to come -- specifically he felt that there needed to be a intro paragraph
on some of the top-level pages. Perhaps some common thing (like first char
big, or color) might tie things together better.
- He also commented on the main title in reverse colors is often not as
strong as the title that follows. If you look at
http://hank.org:5000/test3/docs/index.html
he claims that people won't see the title, but rather the text
Part I: mod_perl 1.x Documentation
because we are trained (our entire life) to see black text on white
background. [I'm not sure that's really a problem.]
Oh, before we talked on the phone today he sent this to me. Stas thought I
should post. We don't have to agree or disagree. Just interesting to hear
someone's comments:
>Very good overall, I am impressed with how this has evolved.
>
>I like having the Search function on the left, always above the fold - it's
>in a primary position, intuitive for those looking for a quick answer (which
>is what the entire left-hand nav channel is all about). It's a wash to me
>whether to have always at top right or towards top in left channel.
>
>The dull grey is nice to me - I get a feeling of smart, sophisticated, not
>over-designed, yet accurate, precise. With such a monochromatic site, you
>can really use a new color for special circumstances - important messages,
>topics, etc. It's all about controlling the flow, and right now the flow is
>smooth and there aren't too many "bells and whistles" pulling you away from
>the communication path...so that's smart. I think we (designers) use too
>many colors too often. Here is an example of a great site that follows this
>style - the base site is monochromatic, accented with color when needed to
>get attention.
>
>http://www.audiusa.com/
>
>
>One thing that I don't like is the first line "Tons of documentation..." is
>receding too much. The line that follows "Part 1..." is bigger, bolder,
>louder. So people will tend to skip the first line and go straight to the
>sentence that is yelling louder. But I wouldn't start over-bolding the first
>line to beat the second. You might be able to adjust by giving the first
>line more air - space, above and below. But then every complimentary title
>page does not follow that same rule - they should have an intro sentence or
>paragraph.
>
>There's 45 seconds - plus 30 seconds of overtime.
>
--
Bill Moseley
mailto:moseley@hank.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Argh! (was Re: Search box at top)
Posted by allan <la...@inet.uni2.dk>.
hi,
short message.
as you know i am -1 on:
- moving the search box to the top
- moving the nav widget to the left side of the topbar
- removing the thin lines from the nav-widget [this would
make it three widgets[arrows] and not one big widget]
- replacing the verdana title/menu font to helvetica
Bill Moseley wrote:
> >What if we move the title after the navigation?
>
> Isn't that the same as moving the nav above the title? ;)
has anyone actually tried this ?
./allan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Argh! (was Re: Search box at top)
Posted by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>.
Bill Moseley wrote:
> At 12:43 PM 04/19/02 +0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
>
>>>Hum, I attached an NS4.0 image running on Windows. It's different on
>>
> Linux?
>
>>yup, it's broken. See the attachment.
>
>
> Ouch. I guess I assumed of the 8% to 10% NS4 users, most would be on
> Windows.
>
> Can you send an image of what the search on the nav bar looks like?
it looks fine, the problem that the input window is too big when you put
it on the side. and it ruins the layout.
Good night :)
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Argh! (was Re: Search box at top)
Posted by Bill Moseley <mo...@hank.org>.
At 12:43 PM 04/19/02 +0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
>> Hum, I attached an NS4.0 image running on Windows. It's different on
Linux?
>
>yup, it's broken. See the attachment.
Ouch. I guess I assumed of the 8% to 10% NS4 users, most would be on
Windows.
Can you send an image of what the search on the nav bar looks like?
>> So of those three pages I listed, Stas, what's your choice now?
>
>I don't know now. Whichever you prefer Bill, just please don't change the
>buttons at this stage. And if you go with the sidebar, the Go button
>should go down it doesn't work with NS4/linux.
Ok.
Anyone seen any nice sidebar search boxes on other sites that I can use for
layout ideas?
>I think that the search on top, will help us with the Advanced Search
>page where the advanced form could be at the bottom and used only when
>needed. So we can continue using the basic search most of the time.
>I'm talking about http://hank.org:5000/test1/docs/index.html
>It also allows us to have a bigger input window.
>Anybody has dice handy? :)
Sounds like a good idea. I'm going to sleep, but once again, for those in
other lands:
Search top right, nav left:
http://hank.org:5000/test4/docs/index.html
(ignore search box in sidebar)
Search right, nav left:
http://hank.org:5000/docs/index.html
Search right, nav left and no boxes around nav (Stas says no to this)
http://hank.org:5000/test1/docs/index.html
Search box in left sidebar:
http://hank.org:5000/test2/docs/index.html
Same, but with out borders on nav buttons (Stas say no to this)
http://hank.org:5000/test3/docs/index.html
--
Bill Moseley
mailto:moseley@hank.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org
Re: Argh! (was Re: Search box at top)
Posted by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>.
Bill Moseley wrote:
>>>We tried moving the navigation and search above the title bar. Didn't
>>
> work.
>
>>What if we move the title after the navigation?
>
>
> Isn't that the same as moving the nav above the title? ;)
nope, to do this you have to lift a much harder object, which can be bad
for your back. :)
>>You cannot put 'go' next to the input field, did you check NS4? it's
>>f**ked up.
>
>
> Hum, I attached an NS4.0 image running on Windows. It's different on Linux?
yup, it's broken. See the attachment.
> So of those three pages I listed, Stas, what's your choice now?
I don't know now. Whichever you prefer Bill, just please don't change the
buttons at this stage. And if you go with the sidebar, the Go button
should go down it doesn't work with NS4/linux.
I think that the search on top, will help us with the Advanced Search
page where the advanced form could be at the bottom and used only when
needed. So we can continue using the basic search most of the time.
I'm talking about http://hank.org:5000/test1/docs/index.html
It also allows us to have a bigger input window.
Anybody has dice handy? :)
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: Argh! (was Re: Search box at top)
Posted by Bill Moseley <mo...@hank.org>.
At 11:44 AM 04/19/02 +0800, Stas Bekman wrote:
>IMHO, it's hardly seen. I think we need a concept of a button. Can we
>use a border which is thinner than what we have? Well, we cannot it's a
>single px, but look at the prev button in the attachment I've used a
>lighter shade of grey.
>
>I'm absolutely against removing the border on the [top] button, it gets
>lost in the text and it must be outstanding.
Ok. I think it's ok, but I can also see the concept of the [top] box, to
really show it's a button. I think on some pages where the sections are
short and frequent the [Top] is too obvious. Not a big issue.
>All in all, the navigation widgets are there for a reason, and if you
>hide them what's the point in having them in first place?
They still look like links to me.
BTW -- I don't remember if I commented on this, but anyone else notice how
the dark [SRC] looks bigger than the other buttons? But if you resize
smaller and bring them closer together then you can see they are all the
same. Interesting effect.
>> We tried moving the navigation and search above the title bar. Didn't
work.
>
>What if we move the title after the navigation?
Isn't that the same as moving the nav above the title? ;)
>You cannot put 'go' next to the input field, did you check NS4? it's
>f**ked up.
Hum, I attached an NS4.0 image running on Windows. It's different on Linux?
So of those three pages I listed, Stas, what's your choice now?
Re: Argh! (was Re: Search box at top)
Posted by Stas Bekman <st...@stason.org>.
Bill Moseley wrote:
> Argh = not getting anywhere. And I have to leave for the evening.
>
> Ok, I just spent an hour on the phone with a designer friend. What he
> convinced me of is that Allan and I were really in agreement. Read on.
Thanks for forwarding these comments Bill!
> He does not like the navigation on the left of the content area, nor does
> he like the search box on the left of the content area. (He doesn't like
> anything on the left.) The reason is flow: the eye goes to the title, then
> goes to what's next, and in either case (navigation left or search left) is
> what's next, instead of the text.
That's only important when you just start using the site. When you are
using it all the time, you know exactly what you are looking for and
where things are, so it gets less important and compactness becomes more
important.
> That's exactly the reason I put the search box on the right, and navigation
> left, but then and removed the lines around the navigation buttons. I was
> trying to make the navigation less powerful. Have my cake and eat it too,
> if you will.
IMHO, it's hardly seen. I think we need a concept of a button. Can we
use a border which is thinner than what we have? Well, we cannot it's a
single px, but look at the prev button in the attachment I've used a
lighter shade of grey.
I'm absolutely against removing the border on the [top] button, it gets
lost in the text and it must be outstanding.
All in all, the navigation widgets are there for a reason, and if you
hide them what's the point in having them in first place?
> Here's that again: http://hank.org:5000/test1/docs/index.html
>
> But that's still not enough. Even the light-weight navigation on the left
> side is in the way to some degree. No getting around that.
>
> Again, the main idea is to make the content flow, from the title to the text.
>
> We tried moving the navigation and search above the title bar. Didn't work.
What if we move the title after the navigation?
> Tried placing search above the title on the right, and the nav below title
> on the right. Didn't work, as the right side was way too heavy.
>
> He suggested since the navigation is related to the current page that the
> navigation could be *in* the title bar on the right side. But our titles
> are too long, so the title and nav won't fit on the same line.
>
> My he suggested moving the search to the left-hand sidebar. ("Argh, that's
> where it just came from", I said.)
>
> In short: We felt that this was the best design:
>
> http://hank.org:5000/test3/docs/index.html
>
> because there was the least amount of stuff blocking the path between the
> title bar and the content.
You cannot put 'go' next to the input field, did you check NS4? it's
f**ked up.
__________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org
mailto:stas@stason.org http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com
http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
Re: Argh! (was Re: Search box at top)
Posted by Per Einar Ellefsen <pe...@skynet.be>.
At 01:41 19.04.2002, Bill Moseley wrote:
>Ok, I just spent an hour on the phone with a designer friend. What he
>convinced me of is that Allan and I were really in agreement. Read on.
Nice! You're really taking this seriously :)
>Here's that again: http://hank.org:5000/test1/docs/index.html
phew... I thought you had made *big* changes.
>But that's still not enough. Even the light-weight navigation on the left
>side is in the way to some degree. No getting around that.
>
>Again, the main idea is to make the content flow, from the title to the text.
>
>We tried moving the navigation and search above the title bar. Didn't work.
>
>Tried placing search above the title on the right, and the nav below title
>on the right. Didn't work, as the right side was way too heavy.
>
>He suggested since the navigation is related to the current page that the
>navigation could be *in* the title bar on the right side. But our titles
>are too long, so the title and nav won't fit on the same line.
>
>My he suggested moving the search to the left-hand sidebar. ("Argh, that's
>where it just came from", I said.)
>
>In short: We felt that this was the best design:
>
> http://hank.org:5000/test3/docs/index.html
Yes, looks pretty good.
>because there was the least amount of stuff blocking the path between the
>title bar and the content.
>
>Here's the closest to the latest design - the navigation widgets
>bigger/outlined.
>
> http://hank.org:5000/test2/docs/index.html
>
>If the search box goes on the top then we both liked:
>
> http://hank.org:5000/test1/docs/index.html
which is ok too.
>- The "mod" part of the logo is a cool gray which blends in with the site.
>He suggested if that was more of a dirty red (burgundy?) that the logo
>would stand out. He asked one of his photoshop guys to mock up an example.
> I doubt anyone is willing to change, since it was voted on, but it might
>be fun to see. I'll post an example when I get it. He also asked why it
>was mod_perl in the content and modperl in the logo.....
I think we shouldn't change it too much now... After a long discussion
about changing something, we ended up changing nothing. So it'd better stay
that way.
>- He kept commenting on content, which I kept reminding him that more was
>to come -- specifically he felt that there needed to be a intro paragraph
>on some of the top-level pages. Perhaps some common thing (like first char
>big, or color) might tie things together better.
I'll try to handle that.
>- He also commented on the main title in reverse colors is often not as
>strong as the title that follows. If you look at
>
> http://hank.org:5000/test3/docs/index.html
>
>he claims that people won't see the title, but rather the text
>
> Part I: mod_perl 1.x Documentation
>
>because we are trained (our entire life) to see black text on white
>background. [I'm not sure that's really a problem.]
It's true, I am more inclined to look at the center instead of the title
too. But we shouldn't change it. I think that when people are navigating,
one reason they don't look at the title is because they don't have to. They
clicked the link, so they *know* what the title is, no need to look again.
>Oh, before we talked on the phone today he sent this to me. Stas thought I
>should post. We don't have to agree or disagree. Just interesting to hear
>someone's comments:
>
> >One thing that I don't like is the first line "Tons of documentation..." is
> >receding too much. The line that follows "Part 1..." is bigger, bolder,
> >louder. So people will tend to skip the first line and go straight to the
> >sentence that is yelling louder. But I wouldn't start over-bolding the first
> >line to beat the second. You might be able to adjust by giving the first
> >line more air - space, above and below. But then every complimentary title
> >page does not follow that same rule - they should have an intro sentence or
> >paragraph.
Kind of hard to fix. But, as before, it's sort of a non-issue I think,
because we can't really say those paragraphs are very important. The useful
things are the links to the documents, and not the words describing those
links.
--
Per Einar Ellefsen
per.einar@skynet.be
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docs-dev-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docs-dev-help@perl.apache.org