lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Thoughts about the LilyPond web site


From: Joram
Subject: Re: Thoughts about the LilyPond web site
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 17:18:18 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0

Hi David,

> Which means that one cannot just click things together with some web
> design tool resulting in a Flash page inaccessible to blind readers and
> only rendering as intended on Internet Explorer.

That is a very bad style of communication on your end! I am *not*
talking about clicking, not about a flash page, not about non-standard
tools and not about the Internet Explorer, ok? These are just
insinuations. With this attitude you can indeed scare away all possible
contributors.

On the contrary, I am talking about using up-to-date web-standards,
html5 and css and producing an accessible website. Most modern
approaches care pretty much about standards, the times of flash and IE
are over. Not everything is good, but much better than 5 or 10 years
ago. And there is a lot of room for website improvements covering my
suggestions on this basis.

> So our basic workflows starting from Texinfo input (and integrated with
> the workflow of translators) are something that is not easily replaced
> by something "more modern".

I don't know the details of these translators etc. but I suppose a lot
can be done just using CSS. At some point also this workflow will boil
down to html, right? And I am not talking about the contents, because
they are already formatted in a good syntactical manner html-wise, but
about the overall layout. And when I look at the page right now, there
are divs and classes and everything needed for what I proposed. And
once, again: I do not talk about the structure and workflow but the
design/appearance.

And sorry, but probably < 1% of the users are viewing the website using
emacs. So I hope this is not the design goal of the website. The goal
should be to comply with standards, which makes it viewable on main
browsers like ff and chrome, and which makes it accessible. If emacs
follows web-standards that's of course good.

If I find some time, I might do some more specific proposals on small
rearrangements of the content of the main page. For the layout I won't
dare to suggest things.

Best,
Joram



reply via email to

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