Dear Matt, I made some suggestions and they can be found at: - https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/621606/chicken-wiki.tar.gz - https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/621606/chicken-wiki2.tar.gz - https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/621606/chicken-wiki3.tar.gz
They especially differ in respect to what happens to the search box when you shrink the browser window. They are just drafts and would need adjustments to fit all the wiki pages. Please don't blame me for the ugly code. I believe Thomas was the last one to give an opinion about this design (sorry, Thomas, for not replying). ATM I don't have time to play more with it. Feel free to improve it! I'm not sure many chicken folks agree with the proposals. Best wishes, Arthur ---------- Mensagem encaminhada ---------- > From: Matt Gushee <[email protected]> > To: chicken-users <[email protected]> > Cc: > Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 09:20:35 -0700 > Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] Wiki design > > Hello, Arthur and others-- > > So, what has happened with this? I was quiet on this subject > previously because I didn't have much to add, but I thought the > proposed design was a big improvement. > > I'm writing today because, if anyone is still working on updating the > wiki, I have a feature request. Perhaps it's something I could > implement--though I haven't studied the code at all. But I thought > perhaps it was something that should be discussed a bit. > > My proposal is, simply, to include a *mandatory* "last-updated" field > on every page. > > I'm getting increasingly frustrated (and BTW, this is by no means > specific to Chicken Scheme--it's all over the flipping Internet) at > seeing technical and news articles whose relevance to current reality > cannot be determined because they are undated. > > I suppose the theory is that, since it's a wiki, everyone will pitch > in to make sure the docs are always up to date. But it should be clear > by now that that doesn't always happen. If everything had a date on > it, then we would know to be skeptical of a 3-year-old document; or we > could reasonably assume that a 1-year-old page is more likely correct > than a 3-year-old one. And so on ... > > PS: regarding the menu font--why not have a fallback[s]? If visitors > don't have Noto Sans, they may well have Ubuntu Sans; and if they're > using some weird OS and have neither, I'm sure comparable fonts can be > found for those other platforms? Or were you using @font-face? > > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Arthur Maciel <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dear chickeneers, I promised and I failed: this *is* the last email about > > the wiki redesign (unless there is a major problem with it :) > > > > Following Thomas advice I changed default font to "sans-serif", leaving > > "Noto Sans" only for the menu and h1, h2, h3, h4, h5 and h6. It is much > more > > readable to me now. > > > > https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/621606/chicken-wiki.tar.gz > > > > Best wishes, > > Arthur > > >
_______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
