At 11:44 AM 04/19/02 +0800, Stas Bekman wrote: >IMHO, it's hardly seen. I think we need a concept of a button. Can we >use a border which is thinner than what we have? Well, we cannot it's a >single px, but look at the prev button in the attachment I've used a >lighter shade of grey. > >I'm absolutely against removing the border on the [top] button, it gets >lost in the text and it must be outstanding.
Ok. I think it's ok, but I can also see the concept of the [top] box, to really show it's a button. I think on some pages where the sections are short and frequent the [Top] is too obvious. Not a big issue. >All in all, the navigation widgets are there for a reason, and if you >hide them what's the point in having them in first place? They still look like links to me. BTW -- I don't remember if I commented on this, but anyone else notice how the dark [SRC] looks bigger than the other buttons? But if you resize smaller and bring them closer together then you can see they are all the same. Interesting effect. >> We tried moving the navigation and search above the title bar. Didn't work. > >What if we move the title after the navigation? Isn't that the same as moving the nav above the title? ;) >You cannot put 'go' next to the input field, did you check NS4? it's >f**ked up. Hum, I attached an NS4.0 image running on Windows. It's different on Linux? So of those three pages I listed, Stas, what's your choice now?
ns4go.png
Description: Binary data
-- Bill Moseley mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
