On Sun, Nov 27, 2005 at 01:21:47AM +0100, frantisek holop wrote:
> what a beautiful argument. is css complex for you? am truly sorry for
that.
>
> everybody knows that openbsd is famous for its code quality.
> does that mean that their pages must be ugly? of course not.
> sometimes it almost looks like people here take pride in
> just how ugly the openbsd site is. yes it is. of course
> that's subjective and if nothing else, serves its mission
> (give information) 100%. but that doesn't mean it must hurt
> the eye. there are people here at misc@ who work with
> typography and graphics and so on (raise your hand please),
> and i have a feeling they don't agree that openbsd must have
> debian-ugly pages made by c hackers in 1995 who hate html
> and think "design" is for pussies.
>
> and the signal from the great hackers is that they don't care
> about design at all, so nobody will even try. but that's
> fine, i am not really complaining. but you know what,
> i will propose one shortly just in spite. i will write history.
>
>
> and yes, documentation _can_ be nice and it's not a sin.
>
> and no, the pages do not validate. can follow hundreds
> of standards in the source tree but can't follow 2-5
> (depending on what you do) with (x)html.
>
> where are my patches?
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-bugs&m=102508555325610&w=2
>
> apparently Nick is not too interested in validation but don't worry,
> i will send those patches anyway.
The Web is against good design. You can see this by looking at the most
people's choice of browser. Bad web browsers are the biggest problem in
creating a good looking website. I now nobody using CSS who takes care
of ie 4 or older. Nearly nobody is actually taking care of ie 5/5.5,
too, but thats default in windows 2000.
So you have to get tricky - ever seen the new freebsd website:
<div id="CONTENT">
<div id="FRONTCONTAINER">
<div id="FRONTMAIN">
<div id="FRONTFEATURECONTAINER">
<div id="FRONTFEATURELEFT">
<div id="FRONTFEATURECONTENT">
Yeah, thats good design. That's a div war.
The wasted space at the left and right even not mentioned.
I was subscribed to freebsd-www@ during the change of their site.
Can you image how many people complained about problems in viewing?
Just too many.
HTML and CSS are designed to be platform independend, but you hardly
find any good-looking sites that take care of this advantage.
What a lot of people forget is that having a good website means having
content, not having a good design.
So, we are talking about a better, fresh and modern design using XHTML
and CSS. We can't use XHTML 1.1 (which is the latest web standard)
because most people's browser can't handle it, thats the first limitation
because of a broken web. We can't use modern and complex CSS, too,
because of the same reasons. Beeing modern is not supported by the web.
Thing about all the translaters who have to adapt the new design.
That was sure not what they thought about when they became a translator.
And if we talk about a new design - why don't we talk about generating
sites with a modern scripting language? That's only the next step, but,
who wants that? Who needs that? Who wants to implement it?
If there is only one person who has problems to view the content because
of a new and tricky design, than the new design was a step in the wrong
direction. Thats my opinion.
Jonathan
PS: If we change now to a modern design, how long would is last until
the first person thinks about a flash movie on the starting page?
--
| /"\ ASCII Ribbon | Jonathan Glaschke - Lorenz-Goertz-Stra_e 71,
| \ / Campaign Against | 41238 Moenchengladbach, Germany;
| X HTML In Mail | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| / \ And News | http://jonathan-glaschke.de/
[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]
