[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Website revamp?

From: Maxim Nikulin
Subject: Re: Website revamp?
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 18:25:42 +0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0

05.08.2020 19:03, TEC wrote:
Maxim Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> writes:

Sorry, but "An innovative and intuitive plain text markup syntax" means nothing
to me. "Created by Carsten Dominik in 2003" is a sign of mature and stable
enough software without disgusting "since ..." but contradicts a bit with

Good to know. I'd be interested in hearing more thoughts on this, but for now
here are my own:
  - innovative :: does 'new' and exciting things that similar products don't

This is the most "offensive" word for me. Minor issue is that 2003 means 17 years ago, not new, but really I consider the age as an advantage. I admit that the word could be must have for startup fund raising but it is so general that usually I consider it as an alarm that it could be used just to inflate a phrase when nothing particular could be said fairly. It could increase rating only if reputation of person who mentioned it is known. It seems it is not only my perception: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=innovative

  - intuative :: despite doing a lot, it isn't complex to work with, but
    thoughtfully designed to be easy to use

Actually, I do not mind against "intuitive". Frankly speaking, I have not noticed it at all. "Innovative" caused a kind of temporary blindness. Do not take the following seriously. Every forum/wiki/bug tracker engine has its own peculiarities in markup requiring a special kind of intuition (even before introducing of WYSITYG feature). Old joke: ... with intuitive interface has been automatically upgraded, please, download upgrade your intuition from the site ... It is unrelated to org-mode, I consider its markup syntax as mostly convenient.

In a "full" version my suggestion is to minimize amount of text significantly
larger than 1em. 4em is excessively huge font for normal monitor. I am in doubt
it is feasible to require readable but not oversized font on mobile devices,
1366x768px laptops, and 4k monitors simultaneously.

I take it you mean 1em to be the body text size, and are just referring to the
size of headings? Or do you mean 1rem?
The body text is currently ~1.2rem FYI.

There is a mix of em's and rem's, My complains are for desktop version only. Text size of 1.2em below the banner is OK for me. 4em for "Org-mode" is excessively huge for me. 3rem=2.7em for "An innovative" is too large as well. 2rem for a couple of paragraphs in the banner ("Designed to...") is too heavy in comparison to 1.2rem=1em in the banner bottom line.

On the other hand, I hope, donate links work but in new design thy are not
contrast and eye catching enough despite their colors.

Interesting that you should say this, personally I find them more eye-catching
than the current grey box in the corner.

I am comparing with widely used yellow "donate" paypal button. On the current site the block is more noticeable due to "irregularity" of its placement. In new variant small text is smoothly put to the banner bottom line somewhere after other text.

I see 3 category of users requiring content different to some extent but should
be easily recognizable:

Mmmm. This is a good point. The essential details are communicated by the
current large banner IMO

I am trying to say that most of the points should be addressed outside of the banner. My personal opinion is that the banner is overloaded already.

reply via email to

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