Re: [boost] New boost webpage
----Original Message---- From: Andreas Huber [mailto:ahd6974-spamgroupstrap@yahoo.com] Sent: 09 August 2005 21:24 To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] New boost webpage
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
Beth Jacobson writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Beth, your proposals sound interesting... but they'd be a whole lot easier to evaluate if you'd just make up the page or CSS stuff required and post it where we can all get a look at it.
Done. The test page is up at http://bajac.com/boost/
Could we please, please get this rolled in 1.33? IMO this is a huge improvement in terms of the page readability.
That's also my opinion (I did like some tiny details of the old page better but that could be taken care of for 1.34).
Regards,
I really like the new link colouring. It seems to me that embedding links in continous text in a way that is a) easy to ignore when you are reading the text and b) easy to find when you are looking for the link, is essentially a hard problem. I would argue that Beth has got about as close as we are going to get (although I believe Rene objects to underlines). It WOULD be really nice to get this in to 1.33, but on the other hand I am not sure we have a consensus yet AND it is awfully late in the day to be making /any/ changes to the release. Final question: How do we go about establishing if we have a consensus or not so that we can at least update the main boost website? (Even if we can't include in 1.33). -- Martin Bonner Martin.Bonner@Pitechnology.com Pi Technology, Milton Hall, Ely Road, Milton, Cambridge, CB4 6WZ, ENGLAND Tel: +44 (0)1223 441434
Martin Bonner <martin.bonner@pitechnology.com> writes:
----Original Message---- From: Andreas Huber [mailto:ahd6974-spamgroupstrap@yahoo.com] Sent: 09 August 2005 21:24 To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] New boost webpage
Aleksey Gurtovoy wrote:
Beth Jacobson writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Beth, your proposals sound interesting... but they'd be a whole lot easier to evaluate if you'd just make up the page or CSS stuff required and post it where we can all get a look at it.
Done. The test page is up at http://bajac.com/boost/
Could we please, please get this rolled in 1.33? IMO this is a huge improvement in terms of the page readability.
That's also my opinion (I did like some tiny details of the old page better but that could be taken care of for 1.34).
Regards,
I really like the new link colouring.
On my machine links are underlined until you hover over them, when the underline disappears! Is that intentional? It's not bad, but a little surprising to me.
Final question: How do we go about establishing if we have a consensus or not so that we can at least update the main boost website? (Even if we can't include in 1.33).
The usual Boost way would be to leave the person who volunteered (Rene) in charge of making the call. Usually that person will account for the consensus as they see it and the valuable contributions of others (like Beth). -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
From: David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com>
On my machine links are underlined until you hover over them, when the underline disappears! Is that intentional? It's not bad, but a little surprising to me.
The same happens for me. If that was intentional, I don't think it is the right thing to do. The mouse pointer already changes when you hover over a link, so I don't think more is needed. -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;
David Abrahams wrote:
On my machine links are underlined until you hover over them, when the underline disappears! Is that intentional?
Yes.
It's not bad, but a little surprising to me.
It is a bit non-standard. Underlined links generally either change color or, more commonly, do nothing on mouseover. It can be removed from the CSS if people prefer not to have it. (The page you're talking about, BTW, is the one that illustrates the modified CSS files I linked to above.) One more outstanding issue is the links in the banner quote. Right now they have both Rene's light blue underline and my white underline. One or the other should be removed, but I'm not sure which one (mine is more consistent with the other links now, but Rene's is more subtle and perhaps that's more appropriate in this context).
Beth Jacobson wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
On my machine links are underlined until you hover over them, when the underline disappears! Is that intentional?
Yes.
It's not bad, but a little surprising to me.
I like having the links underlined (without the underlining, it's too subtle for my eyes), and I like the disappearing underlining effect.
From: Deane Yang <deane_yang@yahoo.com>
David Abrahams wrote:
On my machine links are underlined until you hover over them, when the underline disappears! Is that intentional?
It's not bad, but a little surprising to me.
I like having the links underlined (without the underlining, it's too subtle for my eyes), and I like the disappearing underlining effect.
Well, there you have it. Complete consensus! ;-) I don't mind the disappearing underlines too much, so ignore my vote for their removal, if you like. -- Rob Stewart stewart@sig.com Software Engineer http://www.sig.com Susquehanna International Group, LLP using std::disclaimer;
In article <200508102100.j7AL0kLk010924@shannonhoon.balstatdev.susq.com>, Rob Stewart <stewart@sig.com> wrote:
I don't mind the disappearing underlines too much, so ignore my vote for their removal, if you like.
I mind the disappearing underlines because they make links on the two parts of the page act *completely* opposite from each other. Ben -- I changed my name: <http://periodic-kingdom.org/People/NameChange.php>
Standard practice is to show the underlines always. If someone (including me) doesn't like them, they can always set the browser to display (or not display) underlines to; never, always, hover. --Suman -----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Ben Artin Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 2:22 PM To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] New boost webpage In article <200508102100.j7AL0kLk010924@shannonhoon.balstatdev.susq.com>, Rob Stewart <stewart@sig.com> wrote:
I don't mind the disappearing underlines too much, so ignore my vote for their removal, if you like.
I mind the disappearing underlines because they make links on the two parts of the page act *completely* opposite from each other. Ben -- I changed my name: <http://periodic-kingdom.org/People/NameChange.php> _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Ben Artin wrote:
I mind the disappearing underlines because they make links on the two parts of the page act *completely* opposite from each other.
That was actually what I liked about them. I thought it made a nice inverse correspondence. Still, they serve no real purpose and are non-standard, so if some people are finding them confusing or even just annoying, that's probably sufficient reason to take them out. I won't change the test page because they don't really interfere with people's ability to evaluate the rest of the changes, but at this point I'm thinking they probably don't belong in the final version.
Ben Artin wrote:
I mind the disappearing underlines because they make links on the two
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 18:57:56 -0400, Beth Jacobson wrote parts of
the page act *completely* opposite from each other.
That was actually what I liked about them. I thought it made a nice inverse correspondence. Still, they serve no real purpose and are non-standard, so if some people are finding them confusing or even just annoying, that's probably sufficient reason to take them out. I won't change the test page because they don't really interfere with people's ability to evaluate the rest of the changes, but at this point I'm thinking they probably don't belong in the final version.
I think the new color scheme is the best I've seen -- I'd ship it. We should leave the underlines -- I agree with the comment that the color by itself is too subtle. I could go either way on the disappering behavior. The nice part is that it gives feedback that you are over the link. But no big deal either way. Thx Beth for jumping in with some fresh ideas -- and of course thx to Rene for all the prior work... Jeff
Jeff Garland wrote:
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 18:57:56 -0400, Beth Jacobson wrote
they serve no real purpose and are non-standard, so if some people are finding them confusing or even just annoying, that's probably sufficient reason to take them out. I won't change the test page because they don't really interfere with people's ability to evaluate the rest of the changes, but at this point I'm thinking they probably don't belong in the final version.
I think the new color scheme is the best I've seen -- I'd ship it. We should leave the underlines -- I agree with the comment that the color by itself is too subtle. I could go either way on the disappering behavior. The nice part is that it gives feedback that you are over the link. But no big deal either way.
Thx Beth for jumping in with some fresh ideas -- and of course thx to Rene for all the prior work...
Thanks Jeff. I should have been clearer before. It's the "disappearings" I'm having doubts about. I agree the underlining is important for clarity. Thanks too, to everyone for their feedback. It really helped to have so many different eyes.
Deane Yang <deane_yang@yahoo.com> writes:
Beth Jacobson wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
On my machine links are underlined until you hover over them, when the underline disappears! Is that intentional?
Yes.
It's not bad, but a little surprising to me.
I like having the links underlined (without the underlining, it's too subtle for my eyes), and I like the disappearing underlining effect.
I think I do, too. An underline *and* a pointy finger is too much clutter. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
On my machine links are underlined until you hover over them, when the underline disappears! Is that intentional?
Yes.
It's not bad, but a little surprising to me.
Disappearing underlines or not, but IMHO it's important to be consistent with right side links, which now work the opposite way. Marcin
participants (2)
-
Ben Artin -
Beth Jacobson -
David Abrahams -
Deane Yang -
Jeff Garland -
Marcin Kalicinski -
Martin Bonner -
Rob Stewart -
Suman Cherukuri