On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 22:28:13 +0000 Stephen Houston <smhousto...@gmail.com> said:
> Oh I almost forgot. Please please please full width as well. No one does > the centered page with large left and right margins anymore. Use the space, > don't waste it. Full width will make documentation much easier to read as > well. I think you're incorrect. People who publish for a living professionally would tell you otherwise. Reading long lines is hard. I'm just going to take 5 major media publications as an example: http://www.smh.com.au/ http://www.bbc.com/ http://edition.cnn.com/ http://www.nytimes.com/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/ No one does it anymore? Really? Professionals who produce content to read have no idea what they are doing? We read down with short lines much better than across, so keep lines short-ish and pan vertically. https://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability Waste space if necessary. Unless you want to flow columns across the screen like a newspaper and scroll horizontally. Good luck with making that work well with a wiki like dokuwiki. Or manually manage content to have their own private column within a page. Keep the site as it is. I did this very specifically for a reason because it makes it easier to read and more visually pleasing. The professionals agree and the examples in daily life are all around you. > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 4:26 PM Stephen Houston <smhousto...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 I've been saying we need a new website bad. And one that is sleek, > > modern, and yes white. Time to look up to date and kept with the times. > > You will notice nearly every major linux distribution and nearly all major > > linux software websites are in the confines of what you describe. Simple, > > flat, white background and black text, sharp but small images that are > > mostly subtle, and responsive design to look good across devices. The > > reason being that this is proven to be the easiest on the eyes and the most > > pleasing to the reader as you said. > > > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017, 3:58 PM Cedric Bail <ced...@ddlm.me> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> As some of you may have noticed we are doing some improvement to our > >> documentation and trying to get things easier when starting with EFL. One > >> of the main issue we are facing is that our website is definitively hard to > >> read for a lot of people. So Paul went on trying to figure out why. > >> > >> The first problem is actually the constrast ratio between background and > >> text. According to W3C accessibility guidelines ( > >> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#contrast-minimum )it should be 4.5:1 at > >> least. Our colors are #818181 for the text and #303030 which give a > >> contrast ratio of 3.39:1 ( https://webaim.org/resources/contrastchecker/ > >> ). And it is worth for people with vision impairment where it should be > >> 7:1. > >> > >> Black on white or white on black would work, but according to some random > >> person on Internet (could not find a scientific evidence/citation of it) a > >> white background force your pupils to contracts, making it easier to focus > >> your eye with a smaller pupil (much like the depth of field is increased > >> with a smaller camera lens). This could be shown by a test carried on 136 > >> subject, where the people reading black text on a white background scored > >> better than any other combination of colors ( > >> http://lite.mst.edu/media/research/ctel/documents/LITE-2003-04.pdf ). > >> > >> The second problem are our links that are difficult to tell wether they > >> have been clicked on or not. Also they have a slight glow around the links > >> that makes them harder to read. The best link on the subject we can point > >> to would be > >> https://www.nngroup.com/articles/guidelines-for-visualizing-links/ . > >> > >> So it would be best to come up with a more accessible design for our web > >> site. If someone want to suggest a new design within those constraint, it > >> would be great, but I would suggest to look at > >> https://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/documentation/ or at http://doc.qt.io/ > >> . They are simple and work well in term of readability. We could easily go > >> with something like that. What do you think ? > >> > >> Cedric > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > >> _______________________________________________ > >> enlightenment-devel mailing list > >> enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- Carsten Haitzler - ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
