On 28/11/05, Eric Faurot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/28/05, Jeremy David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Not to mention the fact that most > > people think it's ugly. If that hurts someone's feelings then I'm sorry, but > > it does no one any favors to ignore errors and broken code. > > Call me a pervert, but actually I sort of like the "vintage" look of it. > FreeBSD > looks so boringly corporate these days... > > I am all for good design, good html and everything, but frankly I don't > feel this kind of discussions helps anything. Yes, having checked the > html sources (with my eyes, not with the validator), I think using > 'better html' could probably help the maintainance a bit. So what? > Would I impose that to the guy that is actually working on the content? > If it were to be changed (maybe it will someday), it would be done > for pragmatic reasons (or for the very own pleasure of the openbsd team, > but that is another story), not to satisfy a dogmatic standpoint. > Which browser? which page?
Agreed. FreeBSD.org web-site's usability was noticeably downgraded after the redesign. Let's see of how I, for one, was using the web-site before the redesign of 2005: 1. open mozilla on non-FreeBSD system, type freebsd.org, hit enter *2. type man, hit enter* 3. select the input area, type the command, press enter Right now, instead of _one_ simple step (2.), I need to follow _three_ undermentioned ugly steps: 2.1 type doc, hit enter 2.2 type man, hit enter 2.3 be totally confused by a list of useless options, find somehow that I should probably just click "Man Online" for the default man.cgi options. Some goes with finding other FreeBSD's resources on the new web-site. Please, redesign OpenBSD's web-site in such fashion in _absolutely no case_. It works fine now, does the job, and isn't ugly to look at. :-) Constantine.
