[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Website revamp?

From: Bruce D'Arcus
Subject: Re: Website revamp?
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 10:47:59 -0400

FWIW, I think this is a great idea!

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020, 10:45 AM TEC <tecosaur@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Russell, Amin,

Thanks for giving me your thoughts on the idea :)
Your responses have lead me to think that this may lead somewhere.

Russell Adams <RLAdams@AdamsInfoServ.Com> writes:

> My feedback is that personally I don't care about trendy web
> pages. I agree with you that adding JS to simple pages makes
> them horrible.

Oh absolutely. I don't want any of those JS-laden pages which load
"We're sorry but this doesn't work properly without _javascript_
enabled. Please enable it to continue."
Urgh. No thanks.

For org, a simple static page of HTML + CSS seems perfect, with
perhaps the odd feature using JS - like copy code block buttons.

> I would suggest though if you can use an Org-based html theme to
> improve the site, that might be useful. It's always nice to be
> able to self-create instead of using other tools.

That would be ideal IMO. I'll see if I run into issues with an
org-export based site.

> I recently tried a read-the-docs theme exported from Org and
> found it very nice, and nearly zero difficulty to integrate.
> That surprised me.

If you want another example, check out my config ;) ---
It's less light weight than what I'm conceptualising, but it's
just produced by org-html-export-to-html ... with a few tweaks
(ok, a lot).

> Getting an Org site theme into core that'd do that, and make the
> website export from that template could be a good idea. Or if
> it's already done (I beg ignorance), perhaps updating that
> template could be a good use of your time?

I think this is what I'll look into first (pending Bastien's
response, of course).

Amin Bandali <bandali@gnu.org> writes:

> Hello,
Hi :)

> While we wait for Bastien and others to chime in, per your
> question in your original proposal email, if you have not seen
> it already, the repository containing the sources for the
> current Org website seems to be at
> <https://code.orgmode.org/bzg/orgweb>.

I wasn't aware of that! Thank you very much for bringing it to my

> If you have some time, perhaps consider making a quick demo of
> one revamped page, to give folks an idea of what sort of changes
> you imagine?

I may just have a go at whipping up a 'revamped' index page, I'll
let you all know how that goes.

> I think the overall design of the Org website is fine, but it
> could use well-thought out enhancements to make browsing around
> and discovering things easier.  That said, I personally wouldn't
> be opposed to a bit of a revamp, if the site continues to work
> well without JS and continue to be accessible in text-based
> browsers (like EWW and Lynx).

As I said earlier, I see no reason for the Org site to be much
more than a simple static page ... just in need of a bit of
massaging into a more aesthetically pleasing shape.


While this may seem like a relatively minor pursuit in the scheme
of things, it is (or at least was in my case) the landing page for
the feature that can draw one into Emacs.

For the sake of curious individuals who aren't sure what to
expect, I think it's worth some effort to make their first
impression lean more towards "Org is a novel and exciting format,
ahead of it's time" than "Org is some old and crufty format that
hasn't received much love" :P

While obviously that goes far beyond the styling of orgmode.org, I
do honestly think that it plays a part.

All the best,


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]