On 06.12.2015 22:12, Aaron Wolf wrote: > > > On 12/06/2015 02:24 AM, mray wrote: > > >> On 06.12.2015 04:29, Aaron Wolf wrote: >>> I don't quite understand why the sun is bouncing around. When it >>> starts to overlap the other objects, it looks really glitchy. >>> Video attached >>> > >> Thanks for the video. This is ... interesting. Actually this >> animation just rotates a white div container with rounded borders, >> and I don't get any glitch like that either on Firefox or >> Chromium. What browser are you using? > > > I'm using Firefox. > > To be clear, regardless of the glitch, when there's only a small > amount of the sun showing, the fact that it blends into the white of > the other div means that when it happens to be at a size like that, > it's not clearly a sun or anything and just seems very weird like "why > is there a little pulsing bump on the border??" > > My inclination is to remove the sun entirely from the project page. >
The sun gets removed, just only after the next breakpoint. Same is true for other background things. It does not really break the page to have it sitting there, I'm more concerned about eventually fixing the glitch. >>> Overall, on my very standard resolution of 1366x768 screen (see >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions — this >>> is called "standardized HDTV 720p/1080i display… used in most >>> cheaper notebooks", i.e. it is extremely common) things are >>> still substantially too big. The layout of stuff on the page is >>> just awkward in that it feels like I can't get a comfortable >>> amount of things on the screen at once. > >> Maybe scaling the whole page down a bit is an option (like we >> scale up on resolutions >2000px)? Change the font-size of the >> <html> element and let me know what values would work fine. > > > Well, I tried just zooming out, and by the time the amount that shows > height-wise is reasonable (note that I have task bar and tab and > address bar, that stuff further cuts down the height of a standard web > browser on this common screen size), the smallest fonts are really > uncomfortably small. > > That said, the more I look at this, the more convinced I am that the > smallest font-size (that used for "matching" and "project total" and > "Projects > Software > " etc.) is actually too small even at full > size. It's just *barely* readable as is. I actually think we should up > the size of that smallest font generally. > > As for the overall thing about being too tall, mainly the issue is the > size of the image/screenshot. Other things about the design are all > really a bit too vertical and tall. The space between the navbar and > the pledge button is taller than needed. I really think basically the > design needs to be adjusted to consider having a good comfortable > amount of stuff showing within the first about 525px below the navbar. > And this should not be done by shrinking everything, as the smallest > font is already too small, and the spacing width-wise is good and > should not be made any smaller at all. More padding on the sides isn't > desirable. > > On an important side note: I feel pretty strongly that we should not > have hard boxes for "software" or whatever other project categories. A > project shouldn't strictly live in a "software" box such that > "Projects > Software > Inkscape > Updates" should exist. Instead, > "software" should be a type of *tag* so that a project can have > multiple tags. And the project page should indicate, probably in the > top-right of the div that has the project title, what tags this > project has. > > A mild side-note: it seems semantically wrong to call the top section > of the project page an <article>. The pledge button and stats and > screen shot are definitely not an article. That needs to be changed. > An <article> is like a blog post, it is specifically for actual > content that could be stripped out and printed as a piece of writing, > an article… > I don't think this is neither the time to change the design, nor the time for any kind of side notes. The design does have issues in my eyes, too. Let us talk about those after there is an actual page to talk about. Concerning the breadcrumbs in particular: I don't think there is an alternative to having one hierarchy - that is the nature of them. >>> >>> I don't know if @media queries can consider height, but I would >>> use the breakpoints in such a way that anything within the 1300 >>> to 1399 width size should be assumed to be widescreen, i.e. to >>> be relatively short height. I think that all taller screen >>> dimensions are more like 1200 pixels wide or less or get into >>> higher-res screens. >>> >>> Other than those two issues, it's looking largely good, although >>> I see various things I might want tweaked, but can wait until we >>> hack out a more operational prototype. >>> >>> Cheers! >>> >>> >>> >>> On 12/05/2015 04:15 PM, mray wrote: >>>> I just want to let you know that my current branch at >>>> >>>> https://git.gnu.io/mray/snowdrift/commits/new-project-page >>>> >>>> contains /project HTML and CSS that "could go live" from my >>>> part. It is not super polished and may still have bigger >>>> issues, but nothing that jumps to my eye. >>>> >>>> Note that I also changed other files and moved css into >>>> default-layout >>>> >>>> Cheers, Robert >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ Design mailing >>>> list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop >>>> https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design >>>> >>> > > >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Design mailing list Design@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
