[ANN] Redesign 2005 Blog
why the lucky stiff
first two designs today. We're rolling these out with a new blog so you
can comment on each design and watch the RSS feed for updates.
http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005/
Your feedback is essential to this project! If you have comments, post
them on the blog soon so we can move this project along.
Thanks, Rubyland.
_why
Karl von Laudermann
There seem to be some problems with the blog itself. When writing a
comment, neither the "preview" button nor the "fancy stuff" link did
anything when I clicked them. This is on Firefox 1.0.1 on Windows XP.
However, since the mail/news gateway is supposedly not working, you
probably won't even see this post. :-/
Curt Hibbs
>
You can either post on the blog, or you can join the discussion ML:
http://rubyforge.org/mail/?group_id=556
Curt
Paul Duncan
These look really great!
> Curt
--
Paul Duncan <pa...@pablotron.org> pabs in #ruby-lang (OPN IRC)
http://www.pablotron.org/ OpenPGP Key ID: 0x82C29562
Anders Engström
(Posted on the blog - but I thought I'd bring it up here too)
I like the design of both layouts. But IMO this poll should really be
about selecting the "default" template for ruby-lang.org. I don't know
how flexible the (X)HTML is - but shouldn't it be possible to ship a
bunch of CSS's and let the user choose which one to use?
//Anders
--
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Anders Engström aeng...@gnejs.net
http://www.gnejs.net PGP-Key: ED010E7F
[Your mind is like an umbrella. It doesn't work unless you open it.]
gabriele renzi
> (Posted on the blog - but I thought I'd bring it up here too)
>
> I like the design of both layouts. But IMO this poll should really be
> about selecting the "default" template for ruby-lang.org. I don't know
> how flexible the (X)HTML is - but shouldn't it be possible to ship a
> bunch of CSS's and let the user choose which one to use?
>
>
> //Anders
but doing this would "avoid" one of the main reason to redesign
ruby-lang: have a better entry point for people new to the language.
Ben Giddings
> (Posted on the blog - but I thought I'd bring it up here too)
>
> I like the design of both layouts. But IMO this poll should really be
> about selecting the "default" template for ruby-lang.org. I don't know
> how flexible the (X)HTML is - but shouldn't it be possible to ship a
> bunch of CSS's and let the user choose which one to use?
To make it easier for those of us working on the project, it would be
really helpful if the comments on the two designs were put on the blog,
and comments about the process in general, or any other Ruby site design
things went to the vit-discuss mailing list:
http://rubyforge.org/mail/?group_id=556
Ben
William Morgan
> I like the design of both layouts. But IMO this poll should really be
> about selecting the "default" template for ruby-lang.org. I don't know
> how flexible the (X)HTML is - but shouldn't it be possible to ship a
> bunch of CSS's and let the user choose which one to use?
Maybe this is OT, but check out http://www.csszengarden.com/ for a cool
example of multiple CSS choices over the same HTML. I think my favorite
is "table layout assassination!".
--
William <wmorgan-...@masanjin.net>
Zach Dennis
> Maybe this is OT, but check out http://www.csszengarden.com/ for a cool
> example of multiple CSS choices over the same HTML. I think my favorite
> is "table layout assassination!".
>
That is pretty sweet, thx for posting that link,
Zach
Simon Strandgaard
It looks good.. its difficult to choose.
Aredridel suggested to put a link to a mac binary on the frontpage.
The number of mac persons that does ruby seems high.
--
Simon Strandgaard
Curt Hibbs
>
> Aredridel suggested to put a link to a mac binary on the frontpage.
> The number of mac persons that does ruby seems high.
There should be an OSX version of the One-Click Ruby Installer fairly soon,
so this shouldn't be a problem.
Curt
vruz
Thanks team for your effort.
My take on this:
When it comes to the content, or picking what should go in the front
page, choosing what's hot, popular or having the power of igniting a
superb Ruby PR machine I think it should be wise to have a good read
at Paul Graham's essay on popularity.
Matz has been quoted several times talking about his fondness for
LISP, and how it helped him to figure out what Ruby should be, and I
think there's a great deal of wisdom we're inheriting from the LISP
hackers that preceded us.
Graham has the ability to put into simple words what would otherwise
take me rivers of ink (or carpal syndrome) for me to write about.
http://www.paulgraham.com/popular.html
Especially paragraph number 9.
And then redesign, comment, ellaborate some more, and think of what we
REALLY want for the long term.
cheers,
vruz
"Peña, Botp"
//The vit-core team (assigned to redesign ruby-lang.org) has
//unveiled our
//first two designs today. We're rolling these out with a new
//blog so you
//can comment on each design and watch the RSS feed for updates.
//
//http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005/
//
//Your feedback is essential to this project! If you have
//comments, post
//them on the blog soon so we can move this project along.
//
//Thanks, Rubyland.
I like all so it is difficult to select choice for main page.
Is it possible to make page theme-able? (eg i want to change logo now and
then -forgive the child spirit)
thanks for the cool designs.
kind regards -botp
//
//_why
//
Thursday
Holy cow, John's "Ruby Red" 3.0 is simply amazing.
Designs by others are impressive too. Lots of talent in ruby land!
Josef 'Jupp' Schugt
All design studies I saw so far at first sight look nice but at second
sight are not so good.
http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005/images/john-rubyred-3.0.png
shows large text using serif fonts and small text using sans-serif. If
one uses both kinds of fonts it should be the other way round. One also
should not use underlined and non-underlined links. Given the link
text/other text ratio one should stick to non-underlined links.
http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005/images/michel-clean-1.1.png
definitely is better. What I do not understand is why it reads 'Español'
but not '日本語'. Background color is very bright. Something like the
one on the right of
http://redhanded.hobix.com/images/ruby-org-mockup.gif were better (not
to use too bright background colors is a matter of accessibility, some
people have problems with to strong contrasts).
Just my 0.02 EUR
Josef 'Jupp' Schugt
Francis Hwang
On Mar 13, 2005, at 3:27 PM, Josef 'Jupp' Schugt wrote:
> why the lucky stiff wrote:
>> The vit-core team (assigned to redesign ruby-lang.org) has unveiled
>> our first two designs today. We're rolling these out with a new blog
>> so you can comment on each design and watch the RSS feed for updates.
>> http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005/
>> Your feedback is essential to this project! If you have comments,
>> post them on the blog soon so we can move this project along.
>
> All design studies I saw so far at first sight look nice but at second
> sight are not so good.
>
> http://redhanded.hobix.com/redesign2005/images/john-rubyred-3.0.png
> shows large text using serif fonts and small text using sans-serif. If
> one uses both kinds of fonts it should be the other way round.
I was convinced that the conventional wisdom was that sans-serif body
text fonts are more readable at the low DPI you get out of most
monitors, though actually now that I spent a whole 60 seconds Googling
I wasn't able to come up with anything substantive either way.
Personally, I just redesigned my site, using serif fonts as body text
.. this might be less legible to some people, but, you know, I use a
modern OS with decent anti-aliasing, so it all looks fine to me ;)
> One also should not use underlined and non-underlined links. Given the
> link text/other text ratio one should stick to non-underlined links.
Consistency is important, but I'd argue the other way: You better have
your links underlined, otherwise you're going to leave your readers
madly scrubbing around the page hunting for links. Life's too short.
There are ways to tone down the visual impact of those underlines using
CSS, if you're concerned about what all that underlining is going to
look like.
Francis Hwang
http://fhwang.net/
Aredridel
> text fonts are more readable at the low DPI you get out of most
> monitors, though actually now that I spent a whole 60 seconds Googling
> I wasn't able to come up with anything substantive either way.
> Personally, I just redesigned my site, using serif fonts as body text
Yeah. Moreso, modern hinting (which even Windows 98 does well enough) is
quite adequate to getting things looking good with serifs.
>
> > One also should not use underlined and non-underlined links. Given the
> > link text/other text ratio one should stick to non-underlined links.
>
> Consistency is important, but I'd argue the other way: You better have
> your links underlined, otherwise you're going to leave your readers
> madly scrubbing around the page hunting for links. Life's too short.
Underlines ++
Ari
martin...@gmail.com
>> shows large text using serif fonts and small text using sans-serif. If
>> one uses both kinds of fonts it should be the other way round.
>
> I was convinced that the conventional wisdom was that sans-serif body
> text fonts are more readable at the low DPI you get out of most
> monitors, though actually now that I spent a whole 60 seconds Googling I
> wasn't able to come up with anything substantive either way.
Sans-serif is the better choice for screen fonts:
http://psychology.wichita.edu/optimalweb/text.htm
martinus
Aredridel
> definitely is better. What I do not understand is why it reads 'Español'
> but not '日本語'. Background color is very bright. Something like the
> one on the right of
> http://redhanded.hobix.com/images/ruby-org-mockup.gif were better (not
> to use too bright background colors is a matter of accessibility, some
> people have problems with to strong contrasts).
I think more have problems with low contrast, in my experience.
Douglas Livingstone
> > (not
> > to use too bright background colors is a matter of accessibility, some
> > people have problems with to strong contrasts).
>
contrast... if you have a problem, or know anyone with such a problem,
suggest to them to make their monitor less bright.
Douglas
vruz
> > text fonts are more readable at the low DPI you get out of most
> > monitors, though actually now that I spent a whole 60 seconds Googling I
> > wasn't able to come up with anything substantive either way.
>
> Sans-serif is the better choice for screen fonts:
> http://psychology.wichita.edu/optimalweb/text.htm
>
very informative and useful link, thank you
Bill Guindon
With some interesting contradictions. Verdana 10 is one of the
slowest to read, with sub optimal legibility, but the most prefered.
Then again, most of us type on a Qwerty keyboard, guess it all evens
out in the end :)
--
Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla)
Francis Hwang
Is that what you'd take away from this study? What about the author's
statement that "...it is really too early to draw any definitive
conclusions from this. Studies need to further examine the effect of
different fonts on reading comprehension." ?
Personally I'd at least like to see some sort of a publication date
(other than the "Last update" notice at the bottom of the page; those
are often not that reliable.) I'd also be interested in what OS was
used in the study, since different OSs can make fonts look much more or
less legible.
Mostly, though, I'm just looking for an excuse to not use any more
Arial or Verdana ... At some point this past year I realized I was just
getting really tired of looking at those fonts. ;)
Francis Hwang
http://fhwang.net/
vruz
> them on the blog soon so we can move this project along.
>
> Thanks, Rubyland.
This is something I've made using the (IMHO) best features of the
proposed designs:
http://vworkers.com/vruz/stuff/screenshots/ruby-home.png
The logo is basically a re-arrangement of 'Clean', sans-serifing
everything, shifting the colour palette, using 'Ruby-Red' as the base
and borrowing some sections from 'Clean'.
I'd be happy with a polished version of this combined look, but I'd
still debate a little more about the content.
Martin Ankerl
> or Verdana ... At some point this past year I realized I was just
> getting really tired of looking at those fonts. ;)
Heh, I also got tired of Arial and Verdana. I have switched to Tahoma on
Windows, and to Bitstream Vera in Linux which there has the best
subpixel hinting I have ever seen.
I think the link I posted is quite old, at least I have known this page
for several years now. but it looks like a very good scientific study,
and there is much more:
http://psychology.wichita.edu/optimalweb/default.htm
martinus
vruz
> proposed designs:
>
> http://vworkers.com/vruz/stuff/screenshots/ruby-home.png
forgot to add
http://www.vworkers.com/vruz/stuff/ruby.graphics/
the logo in SVG and other formats
Josef 'Jupp' Schugt
> Almost every web site uses black on white because it gives the *most*
> contrast... if you have a problem, or know anyone with such a
> problem, suggest to them to make their monitor less bright.
That does not solve the problem. The problem is that modern monitors do
not have phosphors that match their refresh rate. Given the phosphors
that are used these days I would need a monitor with a refresh rate of
about 400 Hz to find black on white acceptable. No chance to compensate
using lower brightness. I wished this *were* a hypothetical problem :-|
Josef 'Jupp' Schugt
--
Dear President George Walker Bush,
the way in which it is tried to install a software patent directive
clearly shows that the EU not democratic. We urgently need brothers in
arms who help us establish democratic structures.
Douglas Livingstone
> Douglas Livingstone wrote:
> > Almost every web site uses black on white because it gives the *most*
> > contrast... if you have a problem, or know anyone with such a
> > problem, suggest to them to make their monitor less bright.
>
> That does not solve the problem. The problem is that modern monitors do
> not have phosphors that match their refresh rate. Given the phosphors
> that are used these days I would need a monitor with a refresh rate of
> about 400 Hz to find black on white acceptable. No chance to compensate
> using lower brightness. I wished this *were* a hypothetical problem :-|
>
How do you handle browsing the web then? I don't quite understand your
problem, especially considering I am writing this with black on white
in gmail. Can you not read
http://www.ruby-doc.org/docs/ProgrammingRuby/ ? How about Google, is
that off limits too? If not, what is your workaround?
Douglas
vruz
> problem, especially considering I am writing this with black on white
> in gmail. Can you not read
> http://www.ruby-doc.org/docs/ProgrammingRuby/ ? How about Google, is
> that off limits too? If not, what is your workaround?
Sometimes I wish I was unable to read certain posts too.
Josef 'Jupp' Schugt
> How do you handle browsing the web then?
I use browsers that either allow me to override the color scheme or per
default use gray on black (like links in text mode).
> I don't quite understand your problem, especially considering I am
> writing this with black on white in gmail.
If possible I am using a terminal emulation with green (lime) on black
(as it was used by ancient monitors :-). In Thunderbird I use black on
gray - and start cursing when someone sends me an HTML-Mail with
hard-wired black on white.
The problem is not that I cannot read the text if it is black on white
but it is definitely stress for my eyes. I only have this problem with
monitors. Books are something different but I must admit that I prefer
recycling paper because it is somewhat gray (unless it smells).
Josef 'Jupp' Schugt
Francis Hwang
On Mar 20, 2005, at 3:06 PM, Josef 'Jupp' Schugt wrote:
>> I don't quite understand your problem, especially considering I am
>> writing this with black on white in gmail.
>
> If possible I am using a terminal emulation with green (lime) on black
> (as it was used by ancient monitors :-). In Thunderbird I use black
> on gray - and start cursing when someone sends me an HTML-Mail with
> hard-wired black on white.
Ideally, mail clients would give you the ability to override HTML
emails with your own custom CSS -- maybe this is a feature request
somewhere in the Thunderbird Bugzilla repository? Anyway, I generally
expect CSS support of any level to be shoddy in mail clients ....
> The problem is not that I cannot read the text if it is black on white
> but it is definitely stress for my eyes. I only have this problem with
> monitors. Books are something different but I must admit that I prefer
> recycling paper because it is somewhat gray (unless it smells).
Well, like you said, refresh rate is part of it. Also, don't
underestimate the importance of DPI, or the fact that a CRT monitor is
basically a gun shooting light at your eyes, as opposed to the passive
diffusion you get out of reading text on paper. BTW, have you tried
those anti-glare screens?
Francis Hwang
http://fhwang.net/
Douglas Livingstone
> Douglas Livingstone wrote:
> > How do you handle browsing the web then?
>
> I use browsers that either allow me to override the color scheme or per
> default use gray on black (like links in text mode).
>
Hmm, have you had any success with client side CSS? Even IE supports that :)
You could have something like this in your user CSS file:
body { background: grey !important; color: black !important; }
Or if you wanted something more aggressive:
* { background-color: grey !important; color: black !important; }
Douglas
martin...@gmail.com
> not have phosphors that match their refresh rate. Given the phosphors
> that are used these days I would need a monitor with a refresh rate of
> about 400 Hz to find black on white acceptable. No chance to compensate
> using lower brightness. I wished this *were* a hypothetical problem :-|
Perhaps you should get a graphic card with DVI and a decent LCD monitor,
if this is such a big problem. I also could not stand anything below
100Hz. The problem is that most monitors have a blurry display if using
100Hz or above, so LCDs are the way to go. Your eyes will thank you :-)
martinus
Jon A. Lambert
> Douglas Livingstone wrote:
>> Almost every web site uses black on white because it gives the *most*
>> contrast... if you have a problem, or know anyone with such a
>> problem, suggest to them to make their monitor less bright.
>
> That does not solve the problem. The problem is that modern monitors
> do not have phosphors that match their refresh rate. Given the
> phosphors that are used these days I would need a monitor with a
> refresh rate of about 400 Hz to find black on white acceptable. No
> chance to compensate using lower brightness. I wished this *were* a
> hypothetical problem :-|
I agree 100%. I also alter the background from white to offwhite, light
grey or some pastel as I simply cannot read black on white. The
comparision to books is not quite the same thing as most paper is not even
close to the white of a CRT monitor.
--
J. Lambert