Am Mittwoch, 17. Juni 2009 11:08:32 schrieb Zarel: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 3:21 AM, Dennis Schridde wrote: > > http://developer.wz2100.net/ starts with bug reports. For a general > > development introductory page this might not be the best choice. I would > > put it more towards "Programming", and maybe even dedicate an own page to > > it. - Reason: The introductory page should direct to the right > > documentation. The chunk of text at the beginning draws more attention > > than necessary. Apart from that: Agreed. > > I agree that it's not perfect, but I'm at a loss for further > improvement, and I feel like I'd lose information from it if I rewrote > it entirely. Feel free to make whatever changes you see fit (it is a > wiki, after all). As I said: Put the bug-reporting part a little bit more down (maybe also link to another page) and it is perfect.
> > PS: Is it possible to improve the CSS of http://developer.wz2100.net/? I > > like the one of http://wz2100.net/ a lot more, if we are going to use the > > site not exclusively for technical documentation. > > [...] > Overall, it's missing a lot of CSS that's probably used in the wiki. > While I agree that what it does implement, it implements better, but > we should probably duplicate all the features of the current CSS file > first. (see below) > > If that's infeasible, at least make sure it's on the same server (make > > wz2100.net a mirror using rsync, for example) and stays in line with the > > current layout/style. (Use the same (links, not copies) CSS files.) > > Ever since it's been moved to guide.wz2100.net, it's been on the same > server. Sorry, I was misinformed. I still remembered the days when it was on an own site, so I assumed just the guide.wz2100.net alias is new. > I would allow any user to edit the Guide pages, however Kamaze > isn't letting me access the user database, so I can't identify users > to allow them access. Understandable. If understood Kamaze right his main concern is that no one should be able to read the DB, which would not happen with an auth-service. So: Does wz2100.net have no kind of authentication/authorisation service? (I am not speaking of Kerberos here... LDAP can afaik provide authentication, then there is saslauthd, dovecot-auth, and whatnot. Thus I would assume there is something that all of phpbb, Trac and whatever you are using support.) > Currently I just give access to nearly any user > who asks for it. > > Using the current layout/style is a bit more complicated. I can > duplicate the _current_ style, and use its stylesheet in addition to > my own, but I can't guarantee that it would be updated when the main > site's layout is updated (that would be up to Kamaze). I was more thinking of a collaboration. ;) I assume that the Trac stylesheet provides formatting which is not relevant to your page, and you might need some rules in addition to that. The trick is to take the CSS, enhance it, and put it back on (dev.)wz2100.net. > > In addition http://guide.wz2100.net/ is not an introductory page like > > http://wz2100.net/user-guide is. > > http://guide.wz2100.net/intro comes closes, though it is not the > > frontpage. > > Well, I'm not sure an intro page would make a good home page. A > contents index with quick links to major sections makes the most sense > to me. More suggestions along these lines would be nice. Point is that if the page becomes the new "User Guide" section of the website, it is no longer a "home page", but a sub page. Further the "User Guide" page on w.n was meant to give the user an overview over the user-relevant aspect of the website. The explanatory and introducing part gets entirely lost in a link list as http://guide.wz2100.net/ is. > > It also has style issues: > > - Starts with a *huge* flash box, which makes the page look almost empty > > on first sight for me. > > Well, the video _is_ a good introduction. And it's only 640x480. If you take desktop-panel, window-decorations, menubar, toolbar, addressbar, bookmarkbar, statusbar, your main-navigation, the headings and that flash blob together, this leaves about 2cm for actual text, of which 100% is the standard 1000-times-read Warzone 2100 description. I do not say you shall remove that video. But put it into a place where it does not distract so much from the actual content. XHTML+CSS and "Web 2.0" techniques i.e. allow for an "expand" or "tell me the story" button. And if you dislike that, the flash monster is still better placed below the actual introduction. What I like about http://wz2100.net/user-guide is that on one screen and in one sight you get a quick overview in very short texts over all the relevant section of the website. > > - "Installing" mentions compilation instructions. I'd prefer a link to > > the Wiki instead. > > It _does_ link to the wiki. It just also provides basic compilation > instructions. I noticed that it does. But the commandline code would tell me at first: Ough, skip over this section, it's not what I want. My point is: Most people view (especially) websites not in a textual way, but more in an image-like way by pattern recognition. If you provide the wrong patterns in the wrong places, they will skip over it, at least on first sight. > > - The Documents Project finds no mention at all. > > The Documents Project is nearly completely written about the 1.10 > version. I've moved nearly all the information relevant to 2.2 into > the Guide itself. I think it should at least get a honourable mention. (You may very well link it as "documentation on the original/old version of Warzone 2100, imo.) > > > - There is no hint to the Development section. > > "Hint"? If you mean link, there's a link to the development section on > the home page. The idea behind that link on the user-guide page was afaik to get some of the users interested, even if they did not know at first that they would be. Of course this idea is arguable. > > - Contact information (better: a link to them) is lacking. > > Can be added. Since I do not know whether this was clear: I meant IRC as on the current page, but also forums, mailinglist, etc. > > - The navigation panel on the right is not immediately noticed as such. > > ...? What navigation panel on the right? There's a navigation panel on > the left, but I'm not entirely sure how you want it to be more > noticeable. Left, right, right, left, what does it matter. ;) Yes, that is the panel I mean. I first did not notice it at all. Then I thought it would belong to the page itself. Summary: It was not immediately clear that it is separate from the content, but the table-of-content for this page. This could for example be emphasised by removing the indention of the content. Or by writing "table of content" above it. Or by printing the page title above it. ... > > In general I would prefer a more textual page with less markup. (Markup > > is like makeup: Best effects are achieved if applied decent.) > > Text is hard to read - users tend to skip over it entirely. That is why I liked the very short texts with the keywords being recognisable links, as on the current user-guide. An issue I see with the g.w.n page is the colours. Colours similar to the background are used for the keyword-headers as well as the link-keywords. This makes it difficult to locate the interesting parts at first glance. Especially the subsection headers and the download link, do not immediately appear to be part of the important content. When a user views a website (and has not yet started reading, s.a.) he will analyse that the text is black, because most of the text he sees is black. Everything else must be additional content, like comments, illustrations, etc. Thus using a colour which blends with the background is not good for headings, they will just not be recognised as important content. This is a little bit different for for in-text links. They are visually part of a block (even if they have a different colour) and will be revealed as keywords by the viewer's eye if the block as a whole caught his/her interest. My preference is to use emphasis (aka bold). Underlines and italics where necessary. (Bold text is much more eye catching than underlines, let alone italics which are almost invisible outside of "read-mode".) PS: The words "download" is a major keyword to most. Thus it should be presented in a way making it immediately visible. > The "list > of links" on the home page isn't much better, but I'm hoping to > eventually add some graphics to make the links more recognizable at a > glance. Easily recognisable graphics could be very well suited to accompany keywords in the text. Good idea. > Do you have a good idea about what it > should look like? Maybe put up a page on the wiki with your layout > idea? I can not promise anything due to time constraints, but if I get to catch a breath, I will have a look. It might be good if you could zip up the source of that page to reduce the workload and so we do not end up with a lorem-ipsum but something actually representing the intended content. --DevU
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
