[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Website revamp?
From: |
gyro funch |
Subject: |
Re: Website revamp? |
Date: |
Tue, 4 Aug 2020 14:44:30 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 |
Your website update is looking great!
A couple of comments:
- If materials are presented that are not relatively recent, it may
indicate to potential users a lack of project vitality.
- Because so many people these days are enticed by videos, I wonder if
links to a few selected, engaging videos could be made prominent on the
home page. I know that creating such a list could be difficult, but
perhaps some consensus could be reached on a few outstanding selections.
-gyro
On 8/4/2020 12:27 AM, TEC wrote:
>
> Good to hear from you!
>
> Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> writes:
>> I do like the animated images in the features page!
>
> Glad you like them! I recently converted the static images to SVGs with
> the help of someone using Emacs27 w/ Cairo, would be nice go do
> something like an animated SVG in the future, but that's for (much)
> later :P
>
>> I do wonder about the order of the topics within that page, e.g.
>> working with source code, although powerful, is probably not the lead
>> item for new users. However, that's a minor point at this stage.
>
> Thanks for this feedback. I prioritised the source code blocks because:
> a) my impression is that to Comp/Data Sci people, they are one of /the/
> most compelling features of Org-mode b) they're similar to elements
> people are familiar with (Jupyter notebooks, R markdown), so the
> Comp/Data Sci segment of our audience is already roughy familiar with
> part of their capabilities
> I shifted the agenda/capture/clocking/etc. features down because
> a) they semantically seem like they should go together b) having them
> near the top pushes down too many other features too much, IMO
>
> Absolutely worth considering the order, please share any further
> thoughts you may have :)
>
>> More generally, can the column width for the text be a function of the
>> window width and have images scaled so that they are not wider than
>> the text column? It should be possible to have mobile friendly
>> without making the columns too narrow for full desktop use. The fact
>> that the images are much wider than the text makes the page look ugly,
>> in my opinion.
>
> The column width already is. I just find long lines undesirable. 50-80
> characters is the standard in publishing for a reason.
>
> To quote from /The Elements of Typographic Style/,
>> Anything from 45 to 75 characters is widely regarded as a satisfactory
>> line length of line for a single-column page set in a serifed text
>> face in a text size. The 66-character line (counting both letters and
>> spaces) is widely regarded as ideal. For multiple-column work, a
>> better average is 40 to 50 characters. If the type is well set and
>> printed, lines of 85 or 90 characters will pose no problem in
>> discontinuous texts, such as bibliographies, or, with generous
>> leading, in footnotes. But even with generous leading, a line that
>> averages more than 75 or So characters is likely to be too long for
>> continuous reading.
>
> There's more to be said about line spacing and the reasons for this - if
> I recall correctly /A practical guide to typography/ (available online)
> goes over this.
>
> I look forward to hearing any further comments you may have!
>
> Timothy.
>
>
pEpkey.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
- Re: Website revamp?, (continued)
- Re: Website revamp?, Maxim Nikulin, 2020/08/27
- Re: Website revamp?, Maxim Nikulin, 2020/08/11
- Re: Website revamp?, Bo Grimes, 2020/08/04
- Re: Website revamp?, Maxim Nikulin, 2020/08/05
- Re: Website revamp?, TEC, 2020/08/05
- Re: Website revamp?, David Rogers, 2020/08/07
Re: Website revamp?, Eric S Fraga, 2020/08/04