On Tuesday 16 September 2008 17:11, Cl?ment wrote: > Matthew Toseland a ?crit : > | On Tuesday 16 September 2008 16:24, Ian Clarke wrote: > |> A few more comments: > |> > |> - The style of the alert box at the top seems inconsistent with the > |> rest of the page. > |> > |> - Perhaps "Welcome to Freenet" should just be "Freenet" - Google > |> doesn't have "Welcome to Google" at the top of their page
Actually, there may be good reasons to have "Welcome to Freenet"? Google is not a network, Google is a search engine. > | > | It might help to free up some space on smaller browser windows. We > want to put > | the security levels and maybe other status info next to it - perhaps the > | logged in identity, perhaps even the alerts? > |> - I still think the reflection on the title is rather cliched these > |> days, its very 2005 > |> > |> - There is a lot of empty space above and below the search box - this > |> seems wasteful (with Google all the empty space is at the bottom) > | > | Strongly agreed, although a small gap is of course worthwhile. > | > | "Search" should perhaps be "Search Freesites" ? It doesn't search shared > | files... but if we have a separate tab for filesharing, maybe we > should just > | do Search here. > | > | What happens when the menu gets bigger? In the long term we're likely > to have > | at least 3 plugins with their own pages as well as Browse Freenet: > | - Chat (non-real-time) > | - Mail > | - Filesharing > | - In the long term maybe real-time chat too. > | > It depends, I've made two css for the menu. One scale, but doesn't fit > well with the other components, the other doesn't scale well, but fit > well whith the other components :/ Other components? What do you mean? > | Of course all of these are anonymous, unlike sharing files > with/chatting with > | My Friends. > | > Maybe we could only add one menu item, like "Anonymous tools", or > something better worded. Perhaps, but Friends are the exception; anonymous tools are the rule. > | What about shrinking the big white border surrounding the page > content? Does > | it serve any purpose? > | > No problem. > > Should we implement the same style as in the mockup page, as there are > maybe best ideas (simple, and good-looking, as the current color scheme > is not really good-looking (especially the black on white, I like the > black-orange-blue scheme though). The rounded corners, for instance, are > a pain in css2 (with css3, it's just border-radius, but we can't use > css3 :/), and we could have a good looking theme without rounded corner. FF3 does some of CSS3, FF2 does less? Other themes are welcome... making it simple and familiar is probably the biggest gain, making it stylish is important but we can have many different styles... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080916/0e1e3906/attachment.pgp>
