You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@forrest.apache.org by David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au> on 2002/05/27 08:05:48 UTC
Forrest look-and-feel
It would help to try keep the look-and-feel aspects discussed
in a separate thread and leave the browser-specific things
to the other threads.
A few issues have been identified so far. Please add any more
such high-level issues.
1) Square edges on the panels vs rounded corners.
2) Need minimum indents for <ul><li> in the menu panel.
Can basic CSS can fix that?
3) Where will the page title be placed? Will it just be the
first piece of content below the light-blue "Page 1 of 5"?
Will it be an <h2> level heading?
4) Is something gained by the white vertical bar down
the left-hand side of the window? We need to retain all
possible page space.
*) More?
Re: Forrest look-and-feel
Posted by Christopher Bentley <cj...@webguy.com.au>.
On Monday, May 27, 2002, at 04:14 PM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> From: "David Crossley" <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>
>
>> It would help to try keep the look-and-feel aspects discussed
>> in a separate thread and leave the browser-specific things
>> to the other threads.
>>
>> A few issues have been identified so far. Please add any more
>> such high-level issues.
>>
>> 1) Square edges on the panels vs rounded corners.
>
> When I saw the rounded edges, I likd them.
> Them they became squared, and I still preferred the rounded.
> Now you show me rounded again, and I realize how crappy the page looks
> while
> downloading.
>
> So I'm for the squared.
> I would like the page to look as pleasant as possible from the first
> character the browser displays.
>
>> 2) Need minimum indents for <ul><li> in the menu panel.
>
> +1
>
>> Can basic CSS can fix that?
Not across all browsers.
>> 3) Where will the page title be placed? Will it just be the
>> first piece of content below the light-blue "Page 1 of 5"?
>> Will it be an <h2> level heading?
>
> The page title should be clearly shown on top of the page IMHO.
>
> BTW, I don't like paging at all, because it obliges me to scroll
> anyways and
> then page too.
> We could keep some ability to switch pages, but it should be based on
> sections IMHO, not on breaking pages just for length preservation.
>
>> 4) Is something gained by the white vertical bar down
>> the left-hand side of the window? We need to retain all
>> possible page space.
>
> +1
>
>> *) More?
>
> Put in some non-compulsory emacscript that can collapse the left-hand
> side.
> It's just a matter of setting the vivibility of that div element.
Here are some Usability issues in regard to that;
*Hides navigation from the User.
*Naming of level 1 menu items becomes an increased issue for content
authors as 2nd level is not visable
*User needs to click to discover more navigation - User may require
repeated clicks until desired submenu item is found.
*User may initially be led down wrong path because they do not see an
item that more clearly represents their target.
*if implemented bullet marks should be replaced by some convention eg.
opening and closing triangle; to flag that there is hidden navigation.
Only a couple of browsers have implemented the CSS to replace an HTML
List's bullet mark with an image.
> --
> Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
> - verba volant, scripta manent -
> (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
I found this recent article on usability quite good - nice summery
<http://www.boxesandarrows.com/archives/002330.php>
Is this kind of input helpful?, Chris
Re: Forrest look-and-feel
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
From: "David Crossley" <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>
> It would help to try keep the look-and-feel aspects discussed
> in a separate thread and leave the browser-specific things
> to the other threads.
>
> A few issues have been identified so far. Please add any more
> such high-level issues.
>
> 1) Square edges on the panels vs rounded corners.
When I saw the rounded edges, I likd them.
Them they became squared, and I still preferred the rounded.
Now you show me rounded again, and I realize how crappy the page looks while
downloading.
So I'm for the squared.
I would like the page to look as pleasant as possible from the first
character the browser displays.
> 2) Need minimum indents for <ul><li> in the menu panel.
+1
> Can basic CSS can fix that?
> 3) Where will the page title be placed? Will it just be the
> first piece of content below the light-blue "Page 1 of 5"?
> Will it be an <h2> level heading?
The page title should be clearly shown on top of the page IMHO.
BTW, I don't like paging at all, because it obliges me to scroll anyways and
then page too.
We could keep some ability to switch pages, but it should be based on
sections IMHO, not on breaking pages just for length preservation.
> 4) Is something gained by the white vertical bar down
> the left-hand side of the window? We need to retain all
> possible page space.
+1
> *) More?
Put in some non-compulsory emacscript that can collapse the left-hand side.
It's just a matter of setting the vivibility of that div element.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Forrest look-and-feel
Posted by Bert Van Kets <be...@vankets.com>.
Thanks for the input. Since this regard the L&F of the page they must go
through the list. Although I doubt that anyone would mind putting them in.
Votes please!
Bert
At 22:42 28/05/2002 +1000, you wrote:
>Bert,
>
> I know your flat out - but just want to flag a Useability issue;
>*The page number feedback text and the page navigation widget at the top of
>content should be mirrored at the bottom of the content.
>Reasoning being that if the User has to scroll down, they don't have to
>scroll back to top of the page to keep Control - also promotes better Flow.
>
>There should be a "To Top" link at bottom of pages also.
>
>What is the formal process for design Comments/Change Requests here?..
>should I just flow these through you..
>
>Chris
Re: Forrest look-and-feel
Posted by Chris Bentley <cj...@webguy.com.au>.
Bert,
I know your flat out - but just want to flag a Useability issue;
*The page number feedback text and the page navigation widget at the top of
content should be mirrored at the bottom of the content.
Reasoning being that if the User has to scroll down, they don't have to
scroll back to top of the page to keep Control - also promotes better Flow.
There should be a "To Top" link at bottom of pages also.
What is the formal process for design Comments/Change Requests here?..
should I just flow these through you..
Chris
Re: Forrest look-and-feel
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>.
Bert Van Kets wrote:
> Hi Forestiers,
>
> David Crossley wrote:
> >It would help to try keep the look-and-feel aspects discussed
> >in a separate thread and leave the browser-specific things
> >to the other threads.
> >
> >A few issues have been identified so far. Please add any more
> >such high-level issues.
> >
> >1) Square edges on the panels vs rounded corners.
>
> The decision to create rounded edges was not made by me. I based this on
> the design from Stefano. There is a PhotoShop file in
> src\resources\layout\xml.apache.org created by Stefano (and girlfriend to
> be exact). I liked it, so used it to create the page.
> I clearly stated in my mails that I would use that file to create the page.
> If I did not need to implement the rounded corners I could have finished
> the page in 1 third the time! I spent a LOT of time getting the corners
> right *every time*.
Sorry, but i did alert the list to the fact that Stefano's
first cut was not final.
If it takes a lot of effort to get the rounded bits to happen,
then i would suggest that indicates that they are too complex
and should be dumped. That is my rule-of-thumb in programming
too - it indicates that i am trying to do it the wrong way.
> >2) Need minimum indents for <ul><li> in the menu panel.
> >Can basic CSS can fix that?
>
> This is just content. At the moment it is done with unnumbered lists, but
> we can change that to lines with indents done by graphics or a table grid.
>
>
> >3) Where will the page title be placed? Will it just be the
> >first piece of content below the light-blue "Page 1 of 5"?
> >Will it be an <h2> level heading?
>
> Actually an h1 would be more relevant since it's considered more important,
> specially by robots indexing the page. We can style it using CSS. The
> location looks correct to me.
>
>
> >4) Is something gained by the white vertical bar down
> >the left-hand side of the window? We need to retain all
> >possible page space.
>
> It adds a little to the design, but can certainly be removed. A lot will
> need to change then. There's a 1 pixel line around the menu that will be
> rather ugly if it gets right up to the edge. I can remove the little line,
> but then a lot of "finesse" is lost from the design.
> Removing the white line simplifies the page a lot. Getting the little
> piece of horizontal bar at the left of the menu scale up with the right
> part was one of the challenges of the page. I cheated a little there since
> they are not in the same table and probably don't scale *exactly* the
> same. Since the menu is between the two no one will ever see it. I tested
> it with very little to very large text in different browsers and you really
> have to take a ruler to see the difference in height a large text sizes.
Leave it there then. However, alarm bells are ringing
out "too complex" again.
> >*) More?
>
> The French say "Les gouts et les couleurs, on ne discutte pas" (we don't
> discuss taste and color) which actually means that there will always be
> differences in opinion on style. One likes rounded corners, the other
> doesn't. One likes a white line at the left, the other doesn't. This
> discussion is endless!
I so not worry about taste and colour ... only usability
matters, and that means not wasting any valuable space on
the page. That is why i raised the issue of the vertical white
bar. I do agree that it helps to give the page a nice look.
> Let's make one thing clear: Let's first come to a decision on the layout
> (what you guys call "look and feel") and only then adjust the page. If we
> keep discussing and trying adjusting I'll be doing nothing but adjusting
> the page all day long. I thought the design was decided upon the
> layout/design from Stefano. Remarks and adjustments should have been made
> then. I made it very clear that I was going to use that design to start from.
The design was there for guidance but was not final.
I guess that we are now seeing troubles when we try to
go to implement it, and we need to revisit the layout.
Can the two ever be separated?
> I might sound harsh, but I've lost *countless* hours in the past creating
> and adjusting designs for customers who don't really know what they
> want. Since we are in a very distributed group here who can't sit around
> the table and make a final decision in a few hours I guess we must all
> accept the fact that we use a site that looks acceptable to everybody but
> mainly is technologically sound.
>
> Let's get a final agreement on the design and only then will I go on
> adjusting the page.
Well, we certainly do not want to waste anyone's time.
However, it is far better to waste a little time now than
to be stuck with a monster when we try to produce it with XSLT.
> Bert
>
> P.S. The above is meant to be constructive! I'm not pissed off, just hate
> to lose time on decision reviews. Do not start a flame war again. I don't
> want to be crying in the corner like Nikola ;-)
Please do not try to make jokes. We have seen that it
does not work in email.
--David
Re: Forrest look-and-feel
Posted by Bert Van Kets <be...@vankets.com>.
Hi Forestiers,
At 16:05 27/05/2002 +1000, you wrote:
>It would help to try keep the look-and-feel aspects discussed
>in a separate thread and leave the browser-specific things
>to the other threads.
>
>A few issues have been identified so far. Please add any more
>such high-level issues.
>
>1) Square edges on the panels vs rounded corners.
The decision to create rounded edges was not made by me. I based this on
the design from Stefano. There is a PhotoShop file in
src\resources\layout\xml.apache.org created by Stefano (and girlfriend to
be exact). I liked it, so used it to create the page.
I clearly stated in my mails that I would use that file to create the page.
If I did not need to implement the rounded corners I could have finished
the page in 1 third the time! I spent a LOT of time getting the corners
right *every time*.
>2) Need minimum indents for <ul><li> in the menu panel.
>Can basic CSS can fix that?
This is just content. At the moment it is done with unnumbered lists, but
we can change that to lines with indents done by graphics or a table grid.
>3) Where will the page title be placed? Will it just be the
>first piece of content below the light-blue "Page 1 of 5"?
>Will it be an <h2> level heading?
Actually an h1 would be more relevant since it's considered more important,
specially by robots indexing the page. We can style it using CSS. The
location looks correct to me.
>4) Is something gained by the white vertical bar down
>the left-hand side of the window? We need to retain all
>possible page space.
It adds a little to the design, but can certainly be removed. A lot will
need to change then. There's a 1 pixel line around the menu that will be
rather ugly if it gets right up to the edge. I can remove the little line,
but then a lot of "finesse" is lost from the design.
Removing the white line simplifies the page a lot. Getting the little
piece of horizontal bar at the left of the menu scale up with the right
part was one of the challenges of the page. I cheated a little there since
they are not in the same table and probably don't scale *exactly* the
same. Since the menu is between the two no one will ever see it. I tested
it with very little to very large text in different browsers and you really
have to take a ruler to see the difference in height a large text sizes.
>*) More?
The French say "Les gouts et les couleurs, on ne discutte pas" (we don't
discuss taste and color) which actually means that there will always be
differences in opinion on style. One likes rounded corners, the other
doesn't. One likes a white line at the left, the other doesn't. This
discussion is endless!
Let's make one thing clear: Let's first come to a decision on the layout
(what you guys call "look and feel") and only then adjust the page. If we
keep discussing and trying adjusting I'll be doing nothing but adjusting
the page all day long. I thought the design was decided upon the
layout/design from Stefano. Remarks and adjustments should have been made
then. I made it very clear that I was going to use that design to start from.
I might sound harsh, but I've lost *countless* hours in the past creating
and adjusting designs for customers who don't really know what they
want. Since we are in a very distributed group here who can't sit around
the table and make a final decision in a few hours I guess we must all
accept the fact that we use a site that looks acceptable to everybody but
mainly is technologically sound.
Let's get a final agreement on the design and only then will I go on
adjusting the page.
Bert
P.S. The above is meant to be constructive! I'm not pissed off, just hate
to lose time on decision reviews. Do not start a flame war again. I don't
want to be crying in the corner like Nikola ;-)