[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io
|
From: |
David Bjergaard |
|
Subject: |
Re: [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io |
|
Date: |
Thu, 11 Sep 2014 14:43:22 -0400 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) |
I don't want to get too much into specifics of typeface. I personally
like how Crimson looks, it came in a 600 weight (800 is too heavy for
the manual), and it was pretty easy to set up. Thanks for pointing out
Charter though, it looks really good on screen, and I'll probably be
using it in other projects in the future.
As far as the html is concerned... I don't have too much time to whip up
a custom script to process the output of texi2html. If someone gave me
a sed one-liner that could be thrown in a Makefile... well then I'd have
to do something :). The operating parameters of the css are: style the
raw texi2html output, no more no less.
As a compromise, I've changed width to max-width, but the huge amount of
empty space was intentional! I know you paid a lot for all the pixels
on your screen, but text really works best if it breaths a little.
An alternative perspective: Now that the manual automatically sets the
width to 30em, you've got plenty of room for an Emacs window with the
stump sources open in them to work with! (No snarky comments about
violations of the 80 column rule in the stump sources please. :))
Dave
Joram Schrijver <address@hidden> writes:
> Hi,
> I took a look at the mobile styling, and you can easily improve it by
> doing two things:
> The first is adding `<meta name="viewport" content="initial-scale=1">
> ` to the <head> of every page. That should get the initial zoom level
> right. Then you can, on the body, use `max-width: ...` instead of
> `width: ...` to make the pages a proper width on every device.
> The only real problem then left is the fact that every menu, or set of
> links, is a table. That makes a couple of things look a bit bad on
> smaller screens, but nothing too horrible. (The biggest issue is that
> part of the `[<][>]...` menu looks weird because the '[' and ']' are
> sometimes on different lines than the link.)
> Overall this is a great improvement over the previous non-styling. The
> smaller width improves readability by a lot, though as Mehul said it
> does leave a lot of white space. There are always details on which we're
> going to disagree (I'd pick a different font, like Charter[1]) but
> overall this is a wonderful improvement.
> [1]: http://practicaltypography.com/charter.html
> --
> Joram
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014, at 06:25 PM, Mehul Sanghvi wrote:
>
>
> Hi Dave,
>
>
> Yes I do read it on a mobile device. I also read it on the desktop
>
> which in my case is my ThinkPad T430 with a 15" screen. I keep
>
> the windows full-screen, including the browser.
>
>
> I've attached screenshots to give an idea of how things look on my
> screen.
>
> As you can see its a lot of space wasted on either side. I usually
> keep 10%
>
> as the margins on either side. That way its still centred, but not
> that much
>
> waste of real-estate. That's just my personal style.
>
>
> I myself am not very good with CSS, Just happen to do know a few
> things
>
> because I have had to do them for my own site. I'm still trying to
> get proper
>
> rounded corners for tables :)
>
>
>
> Thanks for the link to the Pracitcal Typography site. They look
> like good
>
> suggestions, though I don't agree with all of them. As you said
> some are
>
> against the norm.
>
>
>
> cheers,
>
>
> mehul
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:39 AM, David Bjergaard
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Mehul,
>
>
> I'm still learning the magic of css. I was shooting for ~75
> characters
>
> per line, and a readable (ie slightly large) font size.
>
>
> I'm curious, do you read the manual on a mobile device? I had
> never
>
> considered that a possibility at all since the manual is for a
> linux
>
> desktop environment.
>
>
> Again, since I'm so inexperienced with web design, I've just
> been
>
> following the suggestions that I can find with google. In
> fact, a lot
>
> of my education has come from:
>
> http://practicaltypography.com/summary-of-key-rules.html
>
>
> And implementing the feasible/relevant suggestions. You will
> note that
>
> some of the suggestions there are definitely against the norm
> while
>
> others are pretty standard.
>
>
> I'll look into margin-left and margin-right and see if I can
> achieve
>
> something that looks good if the window is very narrow.
>
>
> Thanks for all the input guys, its really encouraging that
> people care
>
> that our documentation looks good... Now we/I need to make it
> read well
>
> too.
>
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> Mehul Sanghvi <address@hidden> writes:
>
>
> > David,
>
> >
>
> > Great work on the new manual. I like this version. I was in
> the middle
>
> > of typing
>
> > up a response to the original email, when I got the email
> about the
>
> > update you've done.
>
> >
>
> > Using margin-right and margin-left in the body { } in
> style.css might
>
> > be a good idea
>
> > along with percentage values. This will allow it to be more
> readable
>
> > on a mobile device
>
> > as well. It could stay centred but slightly wider margins so
> more of
>
> > the real-estate is
>
> > taken up by the body rather than blank space.
>
> >
>
> > Other than that, I like this second version better.
>
> >
>
> > cheers,
>
> >
>
> > mehul
>
> >
>
> > On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:06 AM, David Bjergaard
>
> > <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > I've fixed some of the things outlined below, you've always
> got
>
> > the
>
> > option to "View > Page Style > No Page Style" in firefox. I'm
> not
>
> > sure
>
> > what the chrome invocation is.
>
> >
>
> > More feedback is definitely welcome! Its really nice to hear
> that
>
> > people
>
> > are benefiting from my work (even if I don't get it right
> the
>
> > first
>
> > time).
>
> >
>
> > Dave
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > David Bjergaard <address@hidden> writes:
>
> >
>
> > > Scott Jaderholm <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > >
>
> > >> But I liked the garish look :(
>
> > >>
>
> > >> I thought I'd share a few of my reasons why just so you
> can be
>
> > aware.
>
> > >> I realize these are very subjective and people will
> disagree
>
> > about
>
> > >> them. I'm not trying to argue that I'm right and anyone
> else
>
> > should
>
> > >> agree with me. I'm totally fine with it looking the way
> you
>
> > like since
>
> > >> you've been putting in the work. I can always use my own
>
> > stylesheet.
>
> > >> These are just FYIs.
>
> > >>
>
> > >> - I like the way links look in the old version. It's
> obvious
>
> > what is a
>
> > >> link and what isn't a link without hovering over the
> text. Blue
>
> > and
>
> > >> purple texts are links. I also like how much clearer it
> is what
>
> > links
>
> > >> you've already visited--they're purple. In your version
> the
>
> > contrast
>
> > >> between visited and not-visited is very slight.
>
> > > I take your point, and will update the colors. (Though
> probably
>
> > not back
>
> > > to the default colors).
>
> > >
>
> > >> - I don't like the all caps. I find it harder to read. I
> find
>
> > it
>
> > >> particularly annoying on the table of contents where you
> want
>
> > to be
>
> > >> able to scan the sections quickly and identify which
> might
>
> > relate to
>
> > >> your issue.
>
> > > Again, I take your point, I was experimenting.
>
> > >> - I don't like how it's centered and narrow. I often read
> at
>
> > 300% zoom
>
> > >> (when far away from my screen, admittedly not the typical
> use
>
> > case)
>
> > >> and I like how the old one filled the window correctly at
>
> > varying zoom
>
> > >> levels. I realize that at 100% zoom with a wide window
> the old
>
> > version
>
> > >> would create very long lines. This didn't bother me, but
> I can
>
> > >> understand that it would bother other people.
>
> > > Unfortunately (unless many others complain) I won't change
> this
>
> > one.
>
> > >> - If there's a way to make Contents be in the same font
> as TOP
>
> > and
>
> > >> INDEX that would be nice :)
>
> > > The old manual is still up (though outdated and won't be
>
> > updated). Also,
>
> > > you can always read the manual from emacs with the info
> page
>
> > created.
>
> > >
>
> > > I don't want to sound pessimistic, I'm very glad for your
>
> > feedback.
>
> > >
>
> > > Dave
>
> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
>
> > Stumpwm-devel mailing list
>
> > address@hidden
>
> > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Mehul N. Sanghvi
>
> email: address@hidden
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Stumpwm-devel mailing list
>
> address@hidden
>
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
>
> Email had 2 attachments:
>
> * Screenshot-20140911-120402.png
> 200k (image/png)
>
> * Screenshot-20140911-120305.png
> 131k (image/png)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stumpwm-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
- [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io, David Bjergaard, 2014/09/04
- Re: [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io, Scott Jaderholm, 2014/09/11
- Re: [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io, David Bjergaard, 2014/09/11
- Re: [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io, David Bjergaard, 2014/09/11
- Re: [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io, Mehul Sanghvi, 2014/09/11
- Re: [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io, David Bjergaard, 2014/09/11
- Re: [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io, Mehul Sanghvi, 2014/09/11
- Re: [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io, Joram Schrijver, 2014/09/11
- Re: [STUMP] New Manual hosted on stumpwm.github.io,
David Bjergaard <=