Re: Techmeet slides - legacy slides/Ivor Williams
On 22 Apr 2009, at 15:04, Chris Jack wrote: I too noticed some of the links were broken to London Perl Monger talks - in particular some of the talks Ivor Williams gave. Some of these seem to have moved to http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/ivorw/slides and also http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/ivorw/slides/geogmod.ppt which is missing a link from the top page. The top page is itself missing. Don't suppose you have a copy? --James
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
L?on Brocard wrote: > Alias ranted: http://use.perl.org/~Alias/journal/38842 > > Which Perl website do you think looks the worst? Which has the worst > navigation? > > We managed to redesign london.pm.org. Is it time to do another? Some aspects of good/bad design are fairly universal, but I think it's worth asking "what are we trying to achieve" here. Who is the audience and what is our message? Also, since we're playing catch-up on this front, there really isn't any harm in derivative design. Brain-drizzle: We have two main audiences: corporate types and geeks. It might be helpful to aim particular sites primarily at one or the other. Eg perl.com/org at corporates, CPAN and .pm sites at techies. To corporate types we want to say: Perl is alive (Brian Blessed voice optional) Perl is suitable for major/"enterprise" applications Lots of other people use Perl, and it's widely supported No, really, it's alive For this, perhaps we should stea^H^H^H^H look to the websites of the likes of Sun, IBM and Oracle? We probably want lots of news and, in particular, case studies, indicators of different companies/orgs using it, stuff about integration. To geeks we want to say: Perl is alive Look at the shiny cool features and stuff! It may be worth looking at the main sites for Python and Ruby, but I don't know if their design is actually any good. Apple and "cool" geek sites might be good inspiration. It's probably worth emphasising the frameworks and so on; some people seem to think that because Perl doesn't have *one*, say, templating system, that it doesn't have any. Anthony -- To contact me directly please apply s/lists/aef/ to my address.
RE: Techmeet slides - legacy slides/Ivor Williams
> James Laver james.la...@gmail.com wrote: > As L?on has just posted to the list, slides from the last techmeet are > now available in PDF format from the london.pm website. > It would be really nice if we could dig up as many past slides as > possible and host them on london.pm.org. A lot of links to slides on > other sites are now dead, which is tragic. I too noticed some of the links were broken to London Perl Monger talks - in particular some of the talks Ivor Williams gave. Some of these seem to have moved to http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/ivorw/slides and also http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/ivorw/slides/geogmod.ppt which is missing a link from the top page. As Ivor is recently deceased, I imagine they may not stay there indefinitely and it might be a nice small tribute to Ivor if we copied them to the London Perl Monger site so they don't disappear. I found Ivor's presentations by searching for the file names on google - it may well be possible to track down a lot of other broken link files this way. For those who don't know: a memorial event for Ivor Williams will take place on the 25th April (i.e. next Saturday), beginning at 2pm, at the West London Trades Union Club, Acton High Street (http://www.wltuc.org/) If you are planning to attend this event, please respond to (e-mail ian.gri...@stcatz-oxford.com), in order that catering can be organised in advance. Regards Chris _ View your Twitter and Flickr updates from one place – Learn more! http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/137984870/direct/01/
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 01:38:49PM +0200, Abigail wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:20:03PM +0100, Simon Wilcox wrote: > > http://www.digitalcraftsmen.net/perl.org/slice.png > IMO. No. Not by a long shot. It's screamy, it hurts your eyes, > and doesn't invite you at all to stay long enough to even read > the first words. Blue + orange is a BAD combination. Backgrounds that fade to pale blue make it harder to read white text at the bottom of the boxes. Sideways scrolling is Bad (although perhaps if it was HTML instead of an image it might re-flow nicely, but I've seen far too many designs similar to this which don't). And what's with the huge but slightly blurry body text? -- David Cantrell | top google result for "internet beard fetish club" The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers. -- attributed by Plato to Socrates
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
2009/4/22 Simon Wilcox : > My point was DO or DO NOT there is no "let's all bitch and moan on a mailing > list, get ourselves in a tizzy and do naff all about it". Well said. Also - let's be really clear on one thing: proper design is VERY hard. This means that when someone has a go and tries to redesign something they will need to invest lots of time and effort in doing it. As design is highly subjective there is also a strong likelihood that what one person loves someone else will hate. Critique should always be welcome - as long as it is constructive. Nonconstructive critique immediately saps the enthusiasm of anyone who wants to get involved. For the most part we (Perl coders) are unlikely to be the best people to do the design. We know the subject too well, we're blind to the flaws of the current sites and we're heavily invested and so may be reluctant to make radical changes. It speaks volumes about the Perl community's approach to design that we don't even have the legal right to use the camel symbol which is most associated with the language. If (when) some design changes come along: * applaud the commitment of whoever but the effort in * don't critique without objective reasons and practical suggestions * if you don't care about design stay out of the discussions Cheers, Edmund. -- e...@ecclestoad.co.uk - http://ecclestoad.co.uk Help Perl newbies: http://www.send-a-newbie.com/
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
On 22/4/09 13:16, Dirk Koopman wrote: Simon Wilcox wrote: http://combust.develooper.com/ I don't suppose combust can be persuaded to work as an FCGI device instead of an antediluvian mod_perl thingy? Dunno. Send patches if you get it working :-) S.
Techmeet slides - legacy slides
As Léon has just posted to the list, slides from the last techmeet are now available in PDF format from the london.pm website. It would be really nice if we could dig up as many past slides as possible and host them on london.pm.org. A lot of links to slides on other sites are now dead, which is tragic. If anyone has a PDF of their old slides handy, or a format that can be converted to PDF (Powerpoint, Keynote etc.) then please send me a copy so I can put them on the website*. --James * Or more likely ask Aidy very nicely :) † † Thanks, Aidy!
Re: London.pm technical meeting about "Less code" on 16th April 2009
2009/4/1 Léon Brocard : > The next technical meeting will be on the 17th April 2009 from 7pm to > 9pm (you may arrive from 6.30pm, sign in at the reception) and the > theme is "Less code". You have to sign up to attend, see the website. Thanks to all the speakers, it rocked! Slides are available at: http://london.pm.org/tech_talks/ Leon
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
On 22/4/09 12:38, Abigail wrote: IMO. No. [snip] Sorry, that was a rhetorical question. I wasn't meaning to open it up for a discussion. My point was DO or DO NOT there is no "let's all bitch and moan on a mailing list, get ourselves in a tizzy and do naff all about it". Yes the colour is a bit bright but at least someone did something. Your[1] turn. S. [1] where 'your' isn't Abigail in particular but everyone on this list who thinking about talking and not doing.
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
Simon Wilcox wrote: http://combust.develooper.com/ I don't suppose combust can be persuaded to work as an FCGI device instead of an antediluvian mod_perl thingy?
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Abigail wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:20:03PM +0100, Simon Wilcox wrote: >> On 22/4/09 11:09, Sue Spence wrote: >>> 2009/4/22 Léon Brocard : Alias ranted: http://use.perl.org/~Alias/journal/38842 Which Perl website do you think looks the worst? Which has the worst navigation? We managed to redesign london.pm.org. Is it time to do another? >>> >>> >>> perl.org - hello, 1996 >> >> BTDT. Is this any better ? >> >> http://www.digitalcraftsmen.net/perl.org/slice.png > > > IMO. No. Not by a long shot. It's screamy, it hurts your eyes, ITYM "it hurts my eyes" > and doesn't invite you at all to stay long enough to even read > the first words. ITYM "it doesn't invite me at all" FWIW, I really like it. Re 1996: Nothing says "stuck in the CGI era" like a website from that particular era... P > But I guess I'm just too old to be a Perl user. ;-) > > > Abigail >
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 13:38 +0200, Abigail wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:20:03PM +0100, Simon Wilcox wrote: > > BTDT. Is this any better ? > > > > http://www.digitalcraftsmen.net/perl.org/slice.png > > IMO. No. Not by a long shot. It's screamy, it hurts your eyes, > and doesn't invite you at all to stay long enough to even read > the first words. Interesting. It was only when Ade knocked up that draft design that I noticed the 'what is perl' text which has (presumably) been on the front page of perl.org for a while now has a rather broken second sentence. The reason I noticed is because when looking at the draft, I saw and read that text first, due to its prominent styling and placement - unlike on the real site where it's hidden off to one side.
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:20:03PM +0100, Simon Wilcox wrote: > On 22/4/09 11:09, Sue Spence wrote: >> 2009/4/22 Léon Brocard : >>> Alias ranted: http://use.perl.org/~Alias/journal/38842 >>> >>> Which Perl website do you think looks the worst? Which has the worst >>> navigation? >>> >>> We managed to redesign london.pm.org. Is it time to do another? >>> >> >> >> perl.org - hello, 1996 > > BTDT. Is this any better ? > > http://www.digitalcraftsmen.net/perl.org/slice.png IMO. No. Not by a long shot. It's screamy, it hurts your eyes, and doesn't invite you at all to stay long enough to even read the first words. But I guess I'm just too old to be a Perl user. ;-) Abigail
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
On 22/4/09 11:09, Sue Spence wrote: 2009/4/22 Léon Brocard : Alias ranted: http://use.perl.org/~Alias/journal/38842 Which Perl website do you think looks the worst? Which has the worst navigation? We managed to redesign london.pm.org. Is it time to do another? perl.org - hello, 1996 BTDT. Is this any better ? http://www.digitalcraftsmen.net/perl.org/slice.png Problem is - design is one thing, content and implementation are another. Who will provide revised content ? - Don't offer, do, post to the list. Who will implement the design in Combust, the CMS that perl.org uses ? - Don't offer, do, post a working link to the list. http://combust.develooper.com/ Bikeshedding FTL. S.
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 07:53:31AM +0100, Léon Brocard wrote: > Alias ranted: http://use.perl.org/~Alias/journal/38842 > > Which Perl website do you think looks the worst? Which has the worst > navigation? > > We managed to redesign london.pm.org. Is it time to do another? Of all the websites Alias mentions, I either don't visit the site, or I have no issues with them. (But then, I don't give a rat's ass for shine - all I care for is information, and most information I care about doesn't need to be any more fancy that a plain ASCII document). Except the one Alias was most positive about. www.yapc.org. I go there, not surprisingly, to find out information about YAPCs. But yapc.org lists many conferences. Top 2 on the list are conferences in the past. The first yapc is only #4 on the list. And the big link doesn't go to the YAPC site, no, it goes to some Google calendar. Functionality, that's important. Who cares whether it was developped in 1996? It's not that people were stupid around that time. Abigail
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
2009/4/22 Léon Brocard : > Alias ranted: http://use.perl.org/~Alias/journal/38842 > > Which Perl website do you think looks the worst? Which has the worst > navigation? > > We managed to redesign london.pm.org. Is it time to do another? > perl.org - hello, 1996
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 07:53:31AM +0100, Léon Brocard wrote: > Which Perl website do you think looks the worst? Which has the worst > navigation? It's as much about the content as its presentation, but I have a certain fondness for a particular entry in the CPAN FAQ: http://cpan.org/misc/cpan-faq.html#VRML_error Tom
Re: Beautiful is better than ugly
On 22/4/09 07:53, Léon Brocard wrote: Alias ranted: http://use.perl.org/~Alias/journal/38842 Which Perl website do you think looks the worst? Which has the worst navigation? We managed to redesign london.pm.org. Is it time to do another? They're all a bit shit for the most part. Last time we talked about this, out of which came the new london.pm.org site, we also used Andy's design as the basis of perlisalive.com. Ask did get back to me about perl.org after a while and was conservatively positive but I'm afraid that we haven't done anything with it since (sorry Ask). The big challenge is buy-in. For the most part the people who run the various sites don't have enough desire to do anything about it. use.perl.org being a case in point. A good step forward would be generating a community banner strip that could be included on all sites that want to take part, giving cross-site navigation and a certain sense of 'belonging'. After that can come refreshes of the individual sites. That could probably done with relatively little effort although driving take up could be harder. I'll marshal my thoughts some more and write more later on. S.
Beautiful is better than ugly
Alias ranted: http://use.perl.org/~Alias/journal/38842 Which Perl website do you think looks the worst? Which has the worst navigation? We managed to redesign london.pm.org. Is it time to do another? Leon
