Re: Website revamp?

[Maxim Nikulin]

01.09.2020 23:39, TEC wrote:

Maxim Nikulin  writes:


Installation page

I am uncertain if it is applicable for other editors, but I would
like to see name of vim plugin since ambiguity (or matter of taste)
exists.. FAQ suggests other vim plugins. I do not remember if I saw
vim-outliner somewhere on orgmode.org. I have not tried any of
these plugins.


Each entry is a link to the extension/plugin in question, is this not 
sufficient?


I think that in respect to vim it is more complicated, so

"Vim: see 
[[https://orgmode.org/worg/org-faq.html#org-outlines-in-vim][FAQ]];


may be more appropriate. However FAQ entry should be updated. Certainly 
jceb/vim-ormode should be added. On the other hand I do not consider 
vim-orgmode as the absolute winner. VimOrganizer is not actively 
maintained but it supports table alignment. Unfortunately internal links 
require a fix. Recent https://github.com/axvr/org.vim , 
https://www.reddit.com/r/orgmode/comments/fbewla/orgvim_a_very_minimal_org_mode_and_outline_mode/ 
is very simple in comparison to projects mentioned above, but header 
folding and syntax highlighting work well. In FAQ it should be mentioned 
in addition to older http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=1266 .


I suppose, the choice depends on features the user is looking for. E.g. 
if neither agenda nor even syntax compatibility with org mode is 
required, any folding syntax rules with Utl.vim (universal text links) 
could be a viable alternative for a note-taking application with some 
spirit of org. It seems, it is difference of expectation that causes 
proliferation of plugins and bring lists like 
https://vim.fandom.com/wiki/Script:List_of_scripts_for_outlining


That is why I found the link that just looks as "vim" rather obscure and 
confusing. Even "vim: vim-orgmode plugin" item is better since a name of 
particular plugin is visible without additional actions as following the 
link or hovering it with mouse (if it is available). Explicitly 
presented name allows to recall it later.


If you decide to update FAQ (maybe it is better to discuss it in a 
dedicated thread), please, do not wipe "obsolete" links completely. Some 
phrase "previously we recommended ..." could add a value for those who 
read the old variant and is trying to figure out where they saw such 
suggestion.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Tom Gillespie  writes:

> Hi Timothy,
> Based on the available relationships Org mode is almost certainly
> a https://schema.org/SoftwareApplication that is a
> https://schema.org/softwareAddOn of https://emacs.org as well is in
> https://schema.org/applicationSuite https://emacs.org. There are a
> number of other properties that could be filled in if anyone has the
> time or inclination. The site also describes the Org file format which
> is probably a https://schema.org/ComputerLanguage (they don't have
> markup language), and somewhere in between there is some
> https://schema.org/SoftwareSourceCode linking everything in the data
> model together. Best,
> Tom

Thanks for that Tom! I'll see if I can somehow integrate all that into
the page (or as much as I sensibly can). Thanks for looking into this a
bit for me. It's much appreciated :)

I think just marking up the home page should be enough. Let me know if
you know otherwise.

Thanks for your help,

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Tom Gillespie]

Hi Timothy,
Based on the available relationships Org mode is almost certainly
a https://schema.org/SoftwareApplication that is a
https://schema.org/softwareAddOn of https://emacs.org as well is in
https://schema.org/applicationSuite https://emacs.org. There are a
number of other properties that could be filled in if anyone has the
time or inclination. The site also describes the Org file format which
is probably a https://schema.org/ComputerLanguage (they don't have
markup language), and somewhere in between there is some
https://schema.org/SoftwareSourceCode linking everything in the data
model together. Best,
Tom

On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 11:17 AM TEC  wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've taken a little look at improving how Org is seen/searched around
> the web. We currently have open graph and twitter meta tags, and I've
> now see that we should be able to improve our search result too.
>
> Looking at
> https://developers.google.com/search/docs/guides/search-gallery this may
> work nicely.
>
> I'm somewhat tempted to designate the home page as an "Organisation".
> I'm not sure how well this fits though. Another option is as a "Software
> Product" ... which also doesn't quite seem right --- second opinions
> would be much appreciated.
>
> Relevant links:
>  - https://schema.org/Organization (https://schema.org/Project could be a
>good sub-type to use)
>  - https://schema.org/SoftwareApplication
>  - https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/logo
>  - https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/software-app
>
> After picking this, I'm going to try embedding Microdata into the
> homepage (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Microdata).
>
> If the Gogs API worked as intended* >:( we may even be able to make the
> release version etc. dynamically set (curl | jq).
>
> All the best,
>
> Timothy.
>
>
> * to see what I'm talking about, try these two commands
>
> curl https://code.orgmode.org/api/v1/repos/bzg/org-mode
> curl https://code.orgmode.org/api/v1/repos/bzg/org-mode/releases
>
>   relevant: 
> https://github.com/gogs/docs-api/blob/master/Repositories/Releases.md
>

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Hi all,

I've taken a little look at improving how Org is seen/searched around
the web. We currently have open graph and twitter meta tags, and I've
now see that we should be able to improve our search result too.

Looking at
https://developers.google.com/search/docs/guides/search-gallery this may
work nicely.

I'm somewhat tempted to designate the home page as an "Organisation".
I'm not sure how well this fits though. Another option is as a "Software
Product" ... which also doesn't quite seem right --- second opinions
would be much appreciated.

Relevant links:
 - https://schema.org/Organization (https://schema.org/Project could be a
   good sub-type to use)
 - https://schema.org/SoftwareApplication
 - https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/logo
 - https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/software-app

After picking this, I'm going to try embedding Microdata into the
homepage (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Microdata).

If the Gogs API worked as intended* >:( we may even be able to make the
release version etc. dynamically set (curl | jq).

All the best,

Timothy.


* to see what I'm talking about, try these two commands

curl https://code.orgmode.org/api/v1/repos/bzg/org-mode
curl https://code.orgmode.org/api/v1/repos/bzg/org-mode/releases

  relevant: 
https://github.com/gogs/docs-api/blob/master/Repositories/Releases.md

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Colin Baxter  writes:

This look really nice - simple but comprehensive and very 
readable.


Thank you for your kind words :)

There is a slight issue with your link 
"javascript:show_org_source()" in
that it wont load of course in non-js browsers such as eww and 
emacs-w3m.


Ah, yes. This is something I'd like to change - if I knew how.

The href="javascript:..." comes from a standalone HTML file which 
is

loaded with

#+include: "...html" export html

In order to populate the anchor href with the correct URL I'd need 
Org

to somehow process the content before including it.

Actually, now that I think about it, perhaps something like this 
could

be the way forward - please let me know if this sounds sane:

- replace preamble.html with a preamble.org
- inside preamble.org have a big html block (the current contents 
of
- preamble.html), but replace the href attribute with a noweb 
tag,

  referencing a names elisp code block
- have the elisp block generate an appropriate  tag for 
the
  current buffer file (I presume this will apply to the 
  #+include-ing

  file)
- success?

All the best,

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Colin Baxter]

Dear Timothy,

> TEC   writes:

> Hello everyone :)

> The end is now in sight! Other than the somewhat bare index page,
> I feel that we're nearing complete coverage of the current site
> (at least all the 'main' pages).

> If you haven't already please give my revamp project a look:
> http://orgmode.tecosaur.com, and let me know if you've got any
> feedback or suggestions.

This look really nice - simple but comprehensive and very readable.

There is a slight issue with your link "javascript:show_org_source()" in
that it wont load of course in non-js browsers such as eww and emacs-w3m. 

Best wishes,

Colin.


Colin Baxter
URL: http://www.Colin-Baxter.com
-
GnuPG fingerprint: 68A8 799C 0230 16E7 BF68  2A27 BBFA 2492 91F5 41C8
-

Re: Website revamp?

[Martin Schöön]

On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 11:37, Bastien  wrote:

> Hi Timothy,
>
> TEC  writes:
>
> > If you haven't already please give my revamp project a look:
> > http://orgmode.tecosaur.com, and let me know if you've got any feedback
> > or suggestions.
>
> Sorry for being so late in commenting but here are my two cents:

* Nice, 'modern' look and feel.
* Code examples are over-sized. I think they should be smaller and yet
would not be hard to read. Disclaimer: I have only tried your work on my
Linux desk-top computer and its 24 inch screen.
* The link to the documentation is a one-way link. I have to use the 'back'
functionality of my browser to get back to the main site.

That's all for now. I have not had time for anything ambitious such as
proof reading the text.

-- 
Martin Schöön

http://hem.bredband.net/b262106/index.html

Re: Website revamp?

[Bastien]

Hi Timothy,

TEC  writes:

> If you haven't already please give my revamp project a look:
> http://orgmode.tecosaur.com, and let me know if you've got any feedback
> or suggestions.

thanks again for this work.  I prioritize the release of 9.4 but I
will have a close look at your proposal afterwards. Let's keep the
discussion on this thread.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Tom Gillespie  writes:

> Oop, one other thing. There is no obvious way back when clicking view
> source, and the button disappears out from under the mouse which is
> quite annoying. Is it possible to retain the header so that one can
> toggle the view of the main page and the source simply by repeatedly
> clicking/tapping? Best,
> Tom

Done! Via an iframe.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Hi Tom,

Thanks for your emails, they're most helpful!
I'll respond to them one at a time.

Tom Gillespie  writes:

> When the dimensions of the browser window become too narrow the links in
> the header move to the hamburger menu. This seems like it is quite bad
> for discoverability. Is there a way that the other sections could be
> concatenated/loaded on scroll if it were that narrow?

This is how it originally was, but that ended up looking messy. Given
the hamburger is a common design, I think visitors should know what to
do with it :D

> Relatedly, it
> seems like it might be better to simply show the features directly
> below the banner on the home page rather than having users click
> through. That is the question that many users will be asking at that
> point in the page, and having the answer there waiting for them seems
> like it would be helpful. I'm not always a fan of the long scroll
> single page approach to this, but it seems like it might make sense
> for the narrow screen case.

I'm thinking I'll just try to /very/ prominently link to features.
Something like the markdown guide's set of three big icons + text could
work (https://www.markdownguide.org/).

Thanks for your feedback!

Timothy

Re: Website revamp?

[Tom Gillespie]

Oop, one other thing. There is no obvious way back when clicking view
source, and the button disappears out from under the mouse which is
quite annoying. Is it possible to retain the header so that one can
toggle the view of the main page and the source simply by repeatedly
clicking/tapping? Best,
Tom

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 11:07 AM Tom Gillespie  wrote:
>
> Hi Timothy,
> Thank you for all your work on this! A couple of suggestions. When
> the dimensions of the browser window become too narrow the links in
> the header move to the hamburger menu. This seems like it is quite bad
> for discoverability. Is there a way that the other sections could be
> concatenated/loaded on scroll if it were that narrow? Relatedly, it
> seems like it might be better to simply show the features directly
> below the banner on the home page rather than having users click
> through. That is the question that many users will be asking at that
> point in the page, and having the answer there waiting for them seems
> like it would be helpful. I'm not always a fan of the long scroll
> single page approach to this, but it seems like it might make sense
> for the narrow screen case. Best!
> Tom
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 9:44 AM TEC  wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hello everyone :)
> >
> > The end is now in sight! Other than the somewhat bare index page, I feel
> > that we're nearing complete coverage of the current site (at least all
> > the 'main' pages).
> >
> > If you haven't already please give my revamp project a look:
> > http://orgmode.tecosaur.com, and let me know if you've got any feedback
> > or suggestions.
> >
> > Hopefully I'll be able to hear from Bastien at some point to get his
> > thoughts on this branch, and to see if he'd be willing to have this
> > replace the current site (eventually) :)
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > Timothy.
> >

Re: Website revamp?

[Tom Gillespie]

Hi Timothy,
Thank you for all your work on this! A couple of suggestions. When
the dimensions of the browser window become too narrow the links in
the header move to the hamburger menu. This seems like it is quite bad
for discoverability. Is there a way that the other sections could be
concatenated/loaded on scroll if it were that narrow? Relatedly, it
seems like it might be better to simply show the features directly
below the banner on the home page rather than having users click
through. That is the question that many users will be asking at that
point in the page, and having the answer there waiting for them seems
like it would be helpful. I'm not always a fan of the long scroll
single page approach to this, but it seems like it might make sense
for the narrow screen case. Best!
Tom

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 9:44 AM TEC  wrote:
>
>
> Hello everyone :)
>
> The end is now in sight! Other than the somewhat bare index page, I feel
> that we're nearing complete coverage of the current site (at least all
> the 'main' pages).
>
> If you haven't already please give my revamp project a look:
> http://orgmode.tecosaur.com, and let me know if you've got any feedback
> or suggestions.
>
> Hopefully I'll be able to hear from Bastien at some point to get his
> thoughts on this branch, and to see if he'd be willing to have this
> replace the current site (eventually) :)
>
> All the best,
>
> Timothy.
>

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Hello everyone :)

The end is now in sight! Other than the somewhat bare index page, I feel
that we're nearing complete coverage of the current site (at least all
the 'main' pages).

If you haven't already please give my revamp project a look:
http://orgmode.tecosaur.com, and let me know if you've got any feedback
or suggestions.

Hopefully I'll be able to hear from Bastien at some point to get his
thoughts on this branch, and to see if he'd be willing to have this
replace the current site (eventually) :)

All the best,

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Maxim Nikulin  writes:

I do not know how much work is required to update animated 
images.

Maybe someone will give better ideas, so do not hurry.


I'll store a link to this email for when I have time to revisit 
this :)


- Publishing. Something wrong with HTML export of the LaTeX 
macro, backslashes
 are exported in description (just as on orgmode.org). Empty 
 braces are
necessary only if space should be kept after a TeX command, e.g. 
"\TeX{} logo",
Unsure if math mode separator is required, but it should allow 
omit braces. I
have tried "@@latex:\\@@LaTeX". It works, but newline is 
inserted before. I

believe, it is OK to use just text LaTeX in e.g. HTML.


This has been improved.


Installation page

I am uncertain if it is applicable for other editors, but I 
would like to see
name of vim plugin since ambiguity (or matter of taste) exists.. 
FAQ suggests
other vim plugins. I do not remember if I saw vim-outliner 
somewhere on

orgmode.org. I have not tried any of these plugins.


Each entry is a link to the extension/plugin in question, is this 
not sufficient?


All the best,

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Maxim Nikulin]

24.08.2020 14:43, TEC wrote:


Here's my overview of the current state of affairs
+ done :: nicer overall theme + done :: make site work on a variety of 
form-factors + done :: nice features page (with animations!)  + done :: 
prettier home page + done :: new "install" page + todo :: content for 
home page + todo :: releases page + todo :: documentation + todo :: 
contribute page + todo :: any missed pages/content


Certainly shortened version of features should appear on the main page. 
Some remarks. I do not know how much work is required to update animated 
images. Maybe someone will give better ideas, so do not hurry.


- Source code. I may be wrong but "C++" instead of "cpp" can be more 
friendly to older org versions bundled with emacs.


Concerning motivation, it seems to be convenient to keep small examples 
intended to check if some feature works or how to use particular 
language construct in a single file in preferred order instead of plenty 
of independent files in some directory.


- Tables. Consider specifying of explicit format, e,g, ";f5"

Another idea of a table that likely could be implemented in a better way

#+caption: Heron's method for $\sqrt{2}$
| iteration | approximation |error |
| ! |   cur |  err |
|---+---+--|
| 0 |   1.0 |  4.1e-01 |
| 1 | 1.500 | -8.6e-02 |
| 2 | 1.417 | -2.5e-03 |
| 3 | 1.41421568628 | -2.1e-06 |
| 4 | 1.41421356238 | -1.0e-11 |
#+TBLFM: 
@4$1..$1=@-1+1::@4$2..$2=(0.5*(@-1+$arg/@-1));f11::@3$3..$3=$result - 
$cur;%.1e

#+CONSTANTS: arg=2.0 result=sqrt(2)

- Folding. Maybe it is better to show cycle for the top-level heading

# screen edge
last line of the previous section
* Section
Maybe single line
** Short subsection
a couple of lines
with some text
** Longer subsection
it
has more
# screen edge when everything is open
text
* Maybe something else

1. Initial state: everything is open
2. Cycle of visibility for top level section till section is open, 
subsections are folded

3 open first subsection

- Publishing. Something wrong with HTML export of the LaTeX macro, 
backslashes are exported in description (just as on orgmode.org). Empty 
braces are necessary only if space should be kept after a TeX command, 
e.g. "\TeX{} logo", Unsure if math mode separator is required, but it 
should allow omit braces. I have tried "@@latex:\\@@LaTeX". It works, 
but newline is inserted before. I believe, it is OK to use just text 
LaTeX in e.g. HTML.


Installation page

I am uncertain if it is applicable for other editors, but I would like 
to see name of vim plugin since ambiguity (or matter of taste) exists.. 
FAQ suggests other vim plugins. I do not remember if I saw vim-outliner 
somewhere on orgmode.org. I have not tried any of these plugins.


Certainly all above is an opinion and it is up to you whether to accept 
or to reject such suggestions.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

TEC  writes: 

Oh my. I just checked that out and it looks ridiculous. I seem 
to have accidentally messed with the mobile styling at some 
point, should be easy to get it to behave sensibly again though.


Please give this another look now, it should be better. 

There is something wrong with nav and banner padding and 
margins. Firefox in adaptive design mode shows a white stripe 
between them when navigation menu is collapsed.  


Yep, I see this. Seems like another thing in need to 
re-addressing.


Should now be addressed :)

Let me know how this seems to you,

Timothy

p.s. You'll be happy to hear I've ended up reducing the 'big' font size across
the board

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Maxim Nikulin  writes: 

I have tried adaptive design tool in firefox. Currently I would 
rather complain concerning the size of the unicorn logo. It 
consumes whole screen when emulation of a phone and landscape 
orientation is selected. I expect more informative greeting. 


Oh my. I just checked that out and it looks ridiculous. I seem to 
have accidentally messed with the mobile styling at some point, 
should be easy to get it to behave sensibly again though.


In the meanwhile I spent some time trying to figure out what is 
considered as the best practice to distinguish mobile/large 
screen device. I did not expect that there is still nothing more 
than viewport width. Blog posts recommended on stackoverflow 
have mostly mobile-first design with oversized fonts on normal 
monitor so I could not take them seriously. Finally I realized 
that MDN (developer.mozilla.org) pages looks quite neat even 
though they have lager fonts for headers in desktop layout than 
in mobile mode. So font size is quite subtle entity in respect 
to perception. 


Media queries + relative units I think can be good in this regard.

There is something wrong with nav and banner padding and 
margins. Firefox in adaptive design mode shows a white stripe 
between them when navigation menu is collapsed. 


Yep, I see this. Seems like another thing in need to 
re-addressing.


I should say that I am impressed (unsure in a positive or a 
negative way however) by the hack with checkbox to show and hide 
the navigation menu.  But certainly I appreciate that it works 
with disabled javascript. Before I was aware only of 
 and  for a similar effect. 




I was unlucky enough to open the page in a browser window of 
such width that bottom banner line resembles a continuous string 
of text with uniformly altering bold/normal text "maintained by 
*Bastien Guerry* and developed by *many others.* Support via" 
and "LibrePay" is more bright again. It is just an opinion. 


Hmm. That sounds non-ideal. I think we can play around with the 
styling for this though, e.g. increase the line height, add a 
margin to offset, etc.


Once again, many thanks for your feedback!

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Maxim Nikulin]

24.08.2020 14:43, TEC wrote:


I have performed debuzzwordification on the header, and implemented the 
compacted design prototyped previously. I expect Maxim will likely still 
think the font-size is too big, but I somewhat like it as it currently 
is :P


I have tried adaptive design tool in firefox. Currently I would rather 
complain concerning the size of the unicorn logo. It consumes whole 
screen when emulation of a phone and landscape orientation is selected. 
I expect more informative greeting.


In the meanwhile I spent some time trying to figure out what is 
considered as the best practice to distinguish mobile/large screen 
device. I did not expect that there is still nothing more than viewport 
width. Blog posts recommended on stackoverflow have mostly mobile-first 
design with oversized fonts on normal monitor so I could not take them 
seriously. Finally I realized that MDN (developer.mozilla.org) pages 
looks quite neat even though they have lager fonts for headers in 
desktop layout than in mobile mode. So font size is quite subtle entity 
in respect to perception.


Maybe I just too mean to allow the banner to consume so much space due 
to huge fonts.


There is something wrong with nav and banner padding and margins. 
Firefox in adaptive design mode shows a white stripe between them when 
navigation menu is collapsed.


I should say that I am impressed (unsure in a positive or a negative way 
however) by the hack with checkbox to show and hide the navigation menu. 
But certainly I appreciate that it works with disabled javascript. 
Before I was aware only of  and  for a similar effect.


06.08.2020 18:52, TEC wrote:
>> I am comparing with widely used yellow "donate" paypal button.
- There is colour to draw the eye - The position is around the main 
design elements, and thus the path of the eyes - Icons, for the

reason outlined above - A more contrasting background - Movement, as
the page scrolls, they move across the middle of the screen Hence,
while they may not be as /in your face/ as some donation promts, I'd
be surprised if someone who looked at the page for more than a few 
seconds didn't notice them.
I was unlucky enough to open the page in a browser window of such width 
that bottom banner line resembles a continuous string of text with 
uniformly altering bold/normal text "maintained by *Bastien Guerry* and 
developed by *many others.* Support via" and "LibrePay" is more bright 
again. It is just an opinion.

Re: Website revamp?

[Maxim Nikulin]

04.08.2020 13:27, TEC wrote:


Eric S Fraga writes:

I do like the animated images in the features page!


Glad you like them! I recently converted the static images to SVGs with 
the help of someone using Emacs27 w/ Cairo, would be nice go do 
something like an animated SVG in the future, but that's for (much) 
later :P


In firefox-63 announce I noticed the following links:
https://css-tricks.com/introduction-reduced-motion-media-query/ "An 
Introduction to the Reduced Motion Media Query" and the reference 
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/@media/prefers-reduced-motion


I am unsure if it is worth respecting such preferences (whether enough 
users aware of it) and I have no clear idea concerning implementation, 
so feel free to ignore this remark.


Depending on the mood, sometimes I would prefer several still images to 
one animated. E.g. for authoring: 1) org file with a couple levels of 
folded headers and visible beginning of content for some section, 2) 
table of contents fragment for the same headers in PDF or HTML, 3) org 
fragment with e.g. an equation or a table, 4) export result for the 
fragment.


There is a web site that I like for high quality texts (mostly) but the 
authors tend to use animated gifs too much. It could be annoying when 
you are tired and decided to read some news to relax. I missed "do not 
repeat gifs" checkbox in the browser settings. Some animated images are 
appropriate and more informative in comparison to ordinary pictures 
however. I do not provide the link since content is not in English.


On the other hand I think that a video on the main page could be 
convenient for mobile visitors. Personally, I would prefer single video 
to animated images scattered over the page. Of course, it requires even 
more efforts, and I am unsure if it is better to use an external 
external service or there is no problem to host in on the org site.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Hello!
Not much has changed since my last message, other than me becoming 
fairly busy :(


I have performed debuzzwordification on the header, and 
implemented the compacted design prototyped previously. I expect 
Maxim will likely still think the font-size is too big, but I 
somewhat like it as it currently is :P


Here's my overview of the current state of affairs
+ done :: nicer overall theme + done :: make site work on a 
variety of form-factors + done :: nice features page (with 
animations!)  + done :: prettier home page + done :: new 
"install" page + todo :: content for home page + todo :: releases 
page + todo :: documentation + todo :: contribute page + todo :: 
any missed pages/content


On another note, I think this just concerns Bastien but before 
this can be merged with https://code.orgmode.org/bzg/orgweb Gogs 
will need to be upgraded to 0.12.0 to support LFS, which I'm using 
to track images and font files.


This re-wrote history too, so that may complicate things a little 
unfortunately.


That's all for now,

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Maxim Nikulin]

04.08.2020 22:53, TEC wrote:
> 
> I love the idea of a demo org file! If anyone would like to help out with 
> creating one by sending in contenders / snippets that would be brilliant!
> 
> Even better - having two or three different demo files based on the use case 
> of
> the new user - e.g. programmer, author, organisation - or something like that.

Actually I still believe that such files already exist.
Note taking demo/intro, in my opinion,
should be roughly as following:

#+STARTUP: overview
#+TITLE: Emacs org-mode demo: header navigation
#+AUTHOR: A relatively new org-mode user

#+begin_abstract
This is an example of =.org= document demonstrating
features that make Emacs with Org-mode a convenient
application for keeping notes.
Tree-like structure allows to show some section
and fold into header line currently unimportant parts.
Rich set of commands helps to manage sections,
jump over headers, search for specific content.
Tags and internal links set relations for notes
stored in different parts of the tree.
#+end_abstract

#+begin_comment
Use =C-c C-n= (it is Emacs notation equivalent to =[Ctrl+c][Ctrl+n]=)
to jump to the first section header.
Having cursor in a header line, try to press =TAB= several times
to reveal section content and to collapse subtree again.
#+end_comment

* Sections

You could read and write org files in any text editor,
but to discover org-mode real power, open this file in Emacs[fn:1].

A line started with stars is a section header.
Org document is a tree of such sections.
Single =*= adds a top level section.

Reading this file for the first time, likely it is better
to ignore links to the manual.

Manual: [[https://orgmode.org/manual/Headlines.html][Headlines]]@@org:, 
[[info:org#Headlines][internal info]]@@.

[fn:1] You might be reading a file exported to PDF or HTML.
To get notion of org-mode markup, compare it to the content
of the original =.org= file.

# Certainly you have guessed that previous paragraph
# adds a footnote.
# This is a comment, a part of text not intended for export.

** Headers tree and visibility

More stars means deeper into the notes tree.

You could manage which parts of the document are currently
important for you. open the related sections
and close everything else.

- =TAB= :: when cursor is in the section header, this key
   - shows section content,
   - then shows whole subtree,
   - then hides subtree again,
   - then the cycle repeats.
- =S-TAB= (=[Shift+Tab]=) :: change subtree visibility
 for the whole document

Above =...= marks verbatim inline text, =- term :: definition=
are the items of a definition list. Just dashes
without colons is an unordered list, certainly lists
could be nested.

There are =#+begin_...#+end_...= blocks e.g. in the very beginning
of the document. They could be folded or opened with =TAB= key as well
while cursor is on the =#+begin_...= line.
On the other hand blocks do not obey commands changing visibility
of section content.

Manual: [[https://orgmode.org/manual/Visibility-Cycling.html][Visibility 
Cycling]]@@org:, [[info:org#Visibility Cycling][internal docs]]@@;
[[https://orgmode.org/manual/Plain-Lists.html][Plain Lists]]@@org:, 
[[info:org#Plain Lists][internal docs]]@@.

** Navigation

Moving cursor with arrows is unnecessary slow,
=[PgDown]= could be too coarse when most of the sections
are closed. There is a number of commands
that move cursor to a particular header.

- =C-c C-u= :: jump to upper level
- =C-c C-n= :: go to the next header
- =C-c C-p= :: previous header
- =C-c C-f= :: jump forward to the header having the same level
- =C-c C-b= :: backward to the header at the same level

=C-l= Emacs command moves line with cursor to the center, top,
then to the bottom of the screen and could make header context
more clear.

Do not be afraid by a lot of new keystrokes.
The same action you could find in the Org menu.
The lists are added just to populate content
of this file with something less boring than
"Header one", "Header two", and "Lorem ipsum..."

Manual: [[https://orgmode.org/manual/Motion.html][Motion]]@@org:, 
[[info:org#Motion][internal docs]]@@.

*** How to hide leading stars and to add indent:code:
:PROPERTIES:
:CUSTOM_ID: startup_indent
:END:

For those who decided to try navigation commands,
this node makes it apparent next vs. forward commands difference.

I was tempting to add
: #+STARTUP: indent
as the first line of this document. I found convenient to have
indent increasing with tree depth. Finally I decided
that it is more important for a demo file to have all stars
marking header file visible.

Colon as a first non-space symbols is intended for short
preformatted (verbatim) blocks.

Manual: [[https://orgmode.org/manual/Org-Indent-Mode.html][Org Indent 
Mode]]@@org:, [[info:org#Clean%20View][internal docs]]@@.

** Creation of new headers

Nobody forbids to type stars directly. However
=C-RET= and =M-RET= (=[Esc] [Enter]= or =[Alt+Enter]= for the 

Re: Website revamp?

[David Rogers]

TEC  writes:


Colin Baxter  writes:


TEC   writes:
- The site is now more mobile friendly, the navbar now has a


Why? How many users are installing org-mode on their 'phones - 
smart or
otherwise? 


Zero, I expect :P


There's at least one. :)

(This message coming to you from Gnus (and org-mode of course) 
running inside the Termux app on my phone.)


What it lacks in speed and display size is compensated by the fact 
that it fits in my pocket.


--
David

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Once again, thanks for the detailed response :)

Maxim Nikulin  writes: 

  - innovative :: does 'new' and exciting things that similar 
  products don't 


This is the most "offensive" word for me. Minor issue is that 
2003 means 17 years ago, not new, but really I consider the age 
as an advantage. I admit that the word could be must have for 
startup fund raising but it is so general that usually I 
consider it as an alarm that it could be used just to inflate a 
phrase when nothing particular could be said fairly. It could 
increase rating only if reputation of person who mentioned it is 
known. It seems it is not only my perception: 
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=innovative 

  - intuative :: despite doing a lot, it isn't complex to work 
  with, but 
thoughtfully designed to be easy to use 


Actually, I do not mind against "intuitive". Frankly speaking, I 
have not noticed it at all. "Innovative" caused a kind of 
temporary blindness. Do not take the following seriously. Every 
forum/wiki/bug tracker engine has its own peculiarities in 
markup requiring a special kind of intuition (even before 
introducing of WYSITYG feature). Old joke: ... with intuitive 
interface has been automatically upgraded, please, download 
upgrade your intuition from the site ... It is unrelated to 
org-mode, I consider its markup syntax as mostly convenient. 


Thanks for putting this to me this way, looking at these terms 
beyond their literal meaning, considering their use as buzzwords 
makes me re-evaluate my impression. It's unfortunate, for I 
believe that Org does truly embody these terms, but I would hate 
for the page to appear as a pile of buzzwords.


Let's change this to something else.

There is a mix of em's and rem's, My complains are for desktop 
version only.  Text size of 1.2em below the banner is OK for me. 
4em for "Org-mode" is excessively huge for me. 3rem=2.7em for 
"An innovative" is too large as well.  2rem for a couple of 
paragraphs in the banner ("Designed to...") is too heavy in 
comparison to 1.2rem=1em in the banner bottom line. 


I see. I'll try some other sizes one I've done the layout 
reflowing at large sizes. While I'd like to tweak the content 
(with what exactly to being something that I have yet to work 
out), I do somewhat like the overall look - including the big 
fonts.


I am comparing with widely used yellow "donate" paypal button. 
On the current site the block is more noticeable due to 
"irregularity"  of its placement. In new variant small text is 
smoothly put to the banner bottom line somewhere after other 
text. 


Ehhh, I can't say the current one jumps out at me at all, for a 
few reasons
- it's positioned away from the body of the text, and where the 
eyes are drawn to - it uses the same colours as the dody text, 
failing to differentiate itself in 
  this regard 
- the background colouring is quite subtle, nowhere near enough 
to make it 
  stand out 
- There are no icons. Icons as non-letters stand out from the 
text around them, 
  helping to draw attention 


To give my thoughts on the redesighed version:
- There is colour to draw the eye - The position is around the 
main design elements, and thus the path of the eyes - Icons, for 
the reason outlined above - A more contrasting background - 
Movement, as the page scrolls, they move across the middle of the 
screen 

Hence, while they may not be as /in your face/ as some donation 
promts, I'd be surprised if someone who looked at the page for 
more than a few seconds didn't notice them.


However, this is just my thoughts on it - let me know if my logic 
makes sense, and if anybody else would like to chime in that would 
be great. 

I see 3 category of users requiring content different to some 
extent but should be easily recognizable: 


Mmmm. This is a good point. The essential details are 
communicated by the current large banner IMO 
I am trying to say that most of the points should be addressed 
outside of the banner. My personal opinion is that the banner is 
overloaded already.


Mmm. A bit of slimming down wouldn't hurt I think. I'd just quite 
like there to be enough in the banner to interest and engage most 
viewers ---prioritising people giving Org a first look---


If you have any ideas for alternatives, please let me know :)

Once again, thanks for taking the time to communicate this - it's 
much appreciated :)


Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Maxim Nikulin]

05.08.2020 19:03, TEC wrote:

Maxim Nikulin  writes:


Sorry, but "An innovative and intuitive plain text markup syntax" means nothing
to me. "Created by Carsten Dominik in 2003" is a sign of mature and stable
enough software without disgusting "since ..." but contradicts a bit with
"innovative".


Good to know. I'd be interested in hearing more thoughts on this, but for now
here are my own:
  - innovative :: does 'new' and exciting things that similar products don't


This is the most "offensive" word for me. Minor issue is that 2003 means 
17 years ago, not new, but really I consider the age as an advantage. I 
admit that the word could be must have for startup fund raising but it 
is so general that usually I consider it as an alarm that it could be 
used just to inflate a phrase when nothing particular could be said 
fairly. It could increase rating only if reputation of person who 
mentioned it is known. It seems it is not only my perception: 
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=innovative



  - intuative :: despite doing a lot, it isn't complex to work with, but
thoughtfully designed to be easy to use


Actually, I do not mind against "intuitive". Frankly speaking, I have 
not noticed it at all. "Innovative" caused a kind of temporary 
blindness. Do not take the following seriously. Every forum/wiki/bug 
tracker engine has its own peculiarities in markup requiring a special 
kind of intuition (even before introducing of WYSITYG feature). Old 
joke: ... with intuitive interface has been automatically upgraded, 
please, download upgrade your intuition from the site ... It is 
unrelated to org-mode, I consider its markup syntax as mostly convenient.



In a "full" version my suggestion is to minimize amount of text significantly
larger than 1em. 4em is excessively huge font for normal monitor. I am in doubt
it is feasible to require readable but not oversized font on mobile devices,
1366x768px laptops, and 4k monitors simultaneously.


I take it you mean 1em to be the body text size, and are just referring to the
size of headings? Or do you mean 1rem?
The body text is currently ~1.2rem FYI.


There is a mix of em's and rem's, My complains are for desktop version 
only. Text size of 1.2em below the banner is OK for me. 4em for 
"Org-mode" is excessively huge for me. 3rem=2.7em for "An innovative" is 
too large as well. 2rem for a couple of paragraphs in the banner 
("Designed to...") is too heavy in comparison to 1.2rem=1em in the 
banner bottom line.



On the other hand, I hope, donate links work but in new design thy are not
contrast and eye catching enough despite their colors.


Interesting that you should say this, personally I find them more eye-catching
than the current grey box in the corner.


I am comparing with widely used yellow "donate" paypal button. On the 
current site the block is more noticeable due to "irregularity"  of its 
placement. In new variant small text is smoothly put to the banner 
bottom line somewhere after other text.



I see 3 category of users requiring content different to some extent but should
be easily recognizable:


Mmmm. This is a good point. The essential details are communicated by the
current large banner IMO


I am trying to say that most of the points should be addressed outside 
of the banner. My personal opinion is that the banner is overloaded already.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Maxim Nikulin  writes: -- lots of stuff --

Since we're talking about newcomers now, I think there are 2c I 
can share.


- I started sliding down the Emacs slope early this year My 
- initial use case was Org, as a replacement of Jupyter (I want an 
- editor, 
 not a fancy web page) 
- I use Doom. I can say with a great degree of confidence that it 
 has made the 
 transition much easier. 
- I think the best we can hope for is name the most common /paths/ 
 into Emacs, and 
 tell the user what they're getting into. 
E.g.


Emacs :: the one and only, configure everything from scratch - 
know exactly what's going on in your config.
Doom :: Adds a bunch of presets for common tasks, and a bunch of 
helper functions/optimisations
Spacemacs :: Features feature-rich functionally 'layers' for 
common tasks


Whichever you choose, using a version control system such as [git] 
is _highly recommended_. Every now and then you'll accidentally 
break something. This allows you to seamlessly roll back.


Hope that's of some interest,

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Maxim Nikulin]

05.08.2020 04:43, Bo Grimes wrote:
best advice I found [1], and I did so by backing up my entire emacs.d 
and then deleting all .elc files. This worked. I've no understanding of 
the underlying technicalities, and I'm pretty sure I had never heard of 
byte-compiled files (except in the most general sense unrelated to 
Emacs).


[2] The idea that someone would use org-mode and not get "hooked" is 
paradoxically unimaginable.


I mean that someone who never heard of emacs may notice e.g. a blog post 
related to org-mode. My opinion that =apt install emacs= even without 
=apt install elpa-org= is more than enough to try how org-mode works. 
=M-x package-install= is unnecessary magic in such case. Decision to 
continue to use traditional note taking application is normal in such 
circumstances and the person is not org-mode user yet. Next mention of 
org-mode still may give better results.


Avoiding =M-x package-install= I am trying to shorten path to really 
first attempt to use org-mode.


I have not heard of problems with .elc files before. Frankly speaking, I 
am surprised that they exist at all. I would expect comparison of source 
file hash with the value saved in compiled file.


Anyway I would expect more problems from previous attempts to install 
packages from withing of emacs than from system-wide packages. However I 
have just noticed that emacs-common contains ready .elc files, but 
elpa-org calls compiler during installation.


I may be wrong but using latest stable version could lead to another 
kind of frustrating problems. Projects evolve with different pace, so 
accidentally org update could break another package relying on removed 
function or variable. I do not know what is more probable. Packages from 
system repositories may have more known bugs but still be more predictable.


I suppose, it is up to a particular user to choose if he sticks to 
system repositories or to latest upstream releases. Each option has its 
weak and strong sides.


As to installation recommendations I would consider something like:

Emacs is a very flexible application and the same is true for org-mode. 
Sometimes it is even hard to decide what set of default settings is 
better. It gives you great power but require additional responsibility. 
Almost certainly you will try to tune emacs and org-mode accordingly to 
your preferences. Please, keep your emacs configuration in a version 
control system, e.g. git and document the purpose of each change in 
commit messages. It would help to review recent changes and revert them 
if you noticed some problems. Definitely in addition you could use notes 
in an org file to log your activity related to improving emacs 
experience to have overview of accepted and rejected options, packages, etc.


However I am in doubt if git could be a rescue in the case of issues 
with .elc files.


Personally I prefer clearly separated roles of installing software and 
using it, otherwise much more security issues arise.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Thanks for stepping through your thoughts in such detail.
I really appreciate it :)

Maxim Nikulin  writes:

> On a phone I would expect to see something like
>
> Org mode for GNU Emacs
>
> - Keeping notes
> - maintaining TODO lists
> - planning projects
> - authoring documents
>
> with a fast and effective plain-text system

I'll do a bit more on the banner design in a day or two, I'll play around a bit
then. Worst case that sort of content would be just under the banner on mobile
devices --- I really want to avoid a 'crammed' look.

> Sorry, but "An innovative and intuitive plain text markup syntax" means 
> nothing
> to me. "Created by Carsten Dominik in 2003" is a sign of mature and stable
> enough software without disgusting "since ..." but contradicts a bit with
> "innovative".

Good to know. I'd be interested in hearing more thoughts on this, but for now
here are my own:
 - innovative :: does 'new' and exciting things that similar products don't
 - intuative :: despite doing a lot, it isn't complex to work with, but
   thoughtfully designed to be easy to use
 - plain text markup sytax :: what Org is ... mostly

I personally don't find 2003 at odds with "innovative". Something can both
have competitive advantages, and be mature.
   
Please let me know if this explanation of my view affects your own.
   
> In a "full" version my suggestion is to minimize amount of text significantly
> larger than 1em. 4em is excessively huge font for normal monitor. I am in 
> doubt
> it is feasible to require readable but not oversized font on mobile devices,
> 1366x768px laptops, and 4k monitors simultaneously.

I take it you mean 1em to be the body text size, and are just referring to the
size of headings? Or do you mean 1rem?
The body text is currently ~1.2rem FYI.

> On the other hand, I hope, donate links work but in new design thy are not
> contrast and eye catching enough despite their colors.

Interesting that you should say this, personally I find them more eye-catching
than the current grey box in the corner.

I'm also planning on repeating that "Created ... support ..." banner on the
other pages, perhaps as a footer --- I haven't worked out the details yet.

If the colour needs to be more prominent, we could turn the styling from links
to buttons, but I suspect the change wouldn't be worth it.

> In my opinion on a laptop/desktop screen the banner should not occupy so much
> vertical space. I like the idea of adaptive one or two column layout depending
> of screen width that you have shown in another message.

I'll look forward to hearing your comments after I get around to implementing
that :)

> I see 3 category of users requiring content different to some extent but 
> should
> be easily recognizable:
>
> - Newcomers need to recognize if org-mode is able to do what are they looking
> for. So features should be presented for them, they should notice links to 
> docs
> and an instruction how to try it
> - "Help desk stuff" in a broad sense who are not aware of org-mode but have to
> help some person when local org-mode guru is not available. They need to 
> quickly
> recognize what is org-mode is at all, so they may look for general 
> descriptions,
> docs, specific discussion groups. Unsure but even "Download" instead "Install"
> might be more noticeable.
> - Experienced users are more or less familiar with the site, they may look for
> project news, hacks, how to debug particular issue or to submit a patch. They
> should be able to find info on not so often used feature or to find specific
> place in docs to send a link to a friend. Unfortunately I am not familiar 
> enough
> with content of the site to recommend "hot" links to the main page.

Mmmm. This is a good point. The essential details are communicated by the
current large banner IMO

- plain text markup syntax
- versatile
- a few use cases
  + keeping notes
  + todo lists
  + planning
  + writing
- system

My current idea is to have the banner be a quick "what is it?", then have
elaboration as the first part of the content, links to other important parts of
the site (e.g. features, install) and little details like latest version and
release date after that.

> Priority of content is different for mobile and laptop/desktop visitors but 
> the
> latter should see content, not just banner and void on the home page. There is
> room for improvement of current home page, but it is more informative than the
> new design demo.

Let's see how this is with the revised banner :)

>> Are you saying that you find the current mention of Emacs in the instillation
>> page works well?
>
> I do not remember how I realized that org-mode is a part of .deb package when 
> I
> decided to try org-mode for the first time. I tend to believe that is not
> immediately clear that first paragraph could be just an alternative to second
> one. Maybe it should be emphasizing with headers:
> "Use org-mode bundled with Emacs" vs. "Install latest stable org-mode package
> from 

Re: Website revamp?

[Maxim Nikulin]

04.08.2020 22:53, TEC wrote:


Please, share your thoughts!


It is just opinion, I am unsure even that all suggestions are consistent 
or reachable with reasonable efforts. Since it is you who actually is 
doing the work, it is your right to choose which arguments should be 
ignored.


On a phone I would expect to see something like

#+begin_quote
Org mode for GNU Emacs

- Keeping notes
- maintaining TODO lists
- planning projects
- authoring documents

with a fast and effective plain-text system
#+end_quote

Sorry, but "An innovative and intuitive plain text markup syntax" means 
nothing to me. "Created by Carsten Dominik in 2003" is a sign of mature 
and stable enough software without disgusting "since ..." but 
contradicts a bit with "innovative".


In a "full" version my suggestion is to minimize amount of text 
significantly larger than 1em. 4em is excessively huge font for normal 
monitor. I am in doubt it is feasible to require readable but not 
oversized font on mobile devices, 1366x768px laptops, and 4k monitors 
simultaneously.


On the other hand, I hope, donate links work but in new design thy are 
not contrast and eye catching enough despite their colors.


In my opinion on a laptop/desktop screen the banner should not occupy so 
much vertical space. I like the idea of adaptive one or two column 
layout depending of screen width that you have shown in another message.


I see 3 category of users requiring content different to some extent but 
should be easily recognizable:


- Newcomers need to recognize if org-mode is able to do what are they 
looking for. So features should be presented for them, they should 
notice links to docs and an instruction how to try it
- "Help desk stuff" in a broad sense who are not aware of org-mode but 
have to help some person when local org-mode guru is not available. They 
need to quickly recognize what is org-mode is at all, so they may look 
for general descriptions, docs, specific discussion groups. Unsure but 
even "Download" instead "Install" might be more noticeable.
- Experienced users are more or less familiar with the site, they may 
look for project news, hacks, how to debug particular issue or to submit 
a patch. They should be able to find info on not so often used feature 
or to find specific place in docs to send a link to a friend. 
Unfortunately I am not familiar enough with content of the site to 
recommend "hot" links to the main page.


Priority of content is different for mobile and laptop/desktop visitors 
but the latter should see content, not just banner and void on the home 
page. There is room for improvement of current home page, but it is more 
informative than the new design demo.


Are you saying that you find the current mention of Emacs in the 
instillation page works well?


I do not remember how I realized that org-mode is a part of .deb package 
when I decided to try org-mode for the first time. I tend to believe 
that is not immediately clear that first paragraph could be just an 
alternative to second one. Maybe it should be emphasizing with headers:
"Use org-mode bundled with Emacs" vs. "Install latest stable org-mode 
package from ELPA".


Please, fix a typo. Should be "Installation".

Even better - having two or three different demo files based on the use 
case of
the new user - e.g. programmer, author, organisation - or something like 
that.


It would be great but it requires more work.

Minor remarks:
- Should not be logo + "Org mode" in the navigation bar a link similar 
to "Home"?
- I am afraid that without clear sign that demo page is an experiment, 
results in search engines could be distorted. Red block with text like 
"See official site https://orgmode.org; and robots.txt file could help 
to avoid confusion of people and crawlers.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

I feel like this may be where I need to jump in with:
  *cough, off-topic

;)

Bo Grimes  writes:

> On 8/5/20 6:26 AM, Eric S Fraga wrote:
>>Org mode on the move is brilliant to have.
>
> Agree!  However, because I too find screen keyboards "very annoying" and small
> screens even more so, my use of Org on the move is limited to Orgzly--which 
> is a
> wonderful app, but I have only one file I use, mobileGTD.org, the notes and
> tasks in which quickly get moved the next time I am at my 32'' monitor!

Re: Website revamp?

[Eric S Fraga]

On Wednesday,  5 Aug 2020 at 06:17, Bo Grimes wrote:
> On 8/4/20 1:54 AM, Eric S Fraga wrote:
>> On Monday,  3 Aug 2020 at 10:03, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
>>> Emacs should run fine on PostmarketOS [1] [2]. Thus Org, too.
>> Emacs runs perfectly fine on Android via termux and org works as well (as 
>> does gnus!).
>>
>> But the issue is the keyboard.
>>
>
> Have you tried "Hacker Keyboard"? I don't use my phone for much, so I
> can't really say, but I know it has esc and ctrl keys and other "real" 
> keyboard features.

Oh, indeed.  I use that keyboard all the time on my phone.  My comment
was more about physical versus screen.  I find screen based keyboards
very annoying.  But that's me.

My solution is actually to use a small (palmtop, as they were called at
one time) computer.  I have two: the OpenPandora and the Planet
Computers Gemini.  I use both often while travelling/commuting.  Full
Debian, full Emacs, etc.  And no intrusive software from Google et
al. on the first of the two.  Org mode on the move is brilliant to have.

-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.3.7-705-gea9463

Re: Website revamp?

[Bo Grimes]

On 8/5/20 6:26 AM, Eric S Fraga wrote:

   Org mode on the move is brilliant to have.


Agree!  However, because I too find screen keyboards "very annoying" and 
small screens even more so, my use of Org on the move is limited to 
Orgzly--which is a wonderful app, but I have only one file I use, 
mobileGTD.org, the notes and tasks in which quickly get moved the next 
time I am at my 32'' monitor!


--
Bo Grimes

Re: Website revamp?

[Bo Grimes]

On 8/4/20 1:54 AM, Eric S Fraga wrote:

On Monday,  3 Aug 2020 at 10:03, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:

Emacs should run fine on PostmarketOS [1] [2]. Thus Org, too.

Emacs runs perfectly fine on Android via termux and org works as well (as does 
gnus!).

But the issue is the keyboard.



Have you tried "Hacker Keyboard"? I don't use my phone for much, so I 
can't really say, but I know it has esc and ctrl keys and other "real" 
keyboard features.


--
Bo Grimes

Re: Website revamp?

[Bo Grimes]

On 8/4/20 11:48 AM, Maxim Nikulin wrote:
As to installation, I believe that org-mode bundled with Emacs is more 
than enough for first try. It is a shorter path to become familiar 
with most prominent features just to start editing of an .org file (or 
to download a prepared demo .org). Getting the latest stable version 
could be a next step for the hooked users. 


I might disagree, slightly, mostly with the last sentence.  This is one 
of the very few issues I feel semi-competent to comment on.  It would be 
impolite to actually say what I thought the only meaning of 'lisp' was 
before Emacs, which I had tasted and spit-out a dozen times before 
really reading in depth about org-mode.  I have expanded my Emacs 
horizons to include org-journal, emacs-w3m, org-roam, ERC,  and 
writeroom  modes, but I don't code.


This is relevant because I had always been satisfied with the built-in 
org-mode.  A couple of weeks ago, when I decided to give org-roam a try, 
my best guess is org-roam pulled in 9.3.6.  That is my best guess 
because suddenly it was there, and that is the only recent package I had 
installed.


That may not be the case, but regardless, I learned I had 9.3.6, which I 
never explicitly installed, when I ran into some errors.  I can no 
longer competently describe exactly what I was doing, but I am pretty 
sure it related to calling org-journal.  I know whatever I was doing 
caused an error message: "Invalid function: org-preserve-local-variables."


I spent some quite frustrating hours searching, and this error was 
frequently mentioned with org-refile, and I think helm and babel.  I was 
on the verge of mailing the list, but I wanted to say I had tried the 
best advice I found [1], and I did so by backing up my entire emacs.d 
and then deleting all .elc files. This worked. I've no understanding of 
the underlying technicalities, and I'm pretty sure I had never heard of 
byte-compiled files (except in the most general sense unrelated to 
Emacs).  It was literally like magic ( maybe magit :-) ) to me when 
Emacs repopulated all my .elc files!


I would, therefore, encourage any new users coming to org-mode and/or 
Emacs to start with the highest, most stable version of both that is 
available to them with their level of competence (for me that is always 
what is in my distro's package manager) and with the further 
explaination that they might run into issues down the road if they don't.


It is true that "[g]etting the latest stable version could be a next 
step for the hooked users", but I have used org-mode for five years 
without doing so, and many people may be so excited (like I was) that 
they finally found the One True Note-taking Tool (tm) that they 
immediately start blindly build an entire system only to crash into a 
byte-compiled wall. Their very first TODO should be "upgrade org-mode 
soon," [2] like "Call Mom" is in the todo.txt examples.


[1] https://github.com/syl20bnr/spacemacs/issues/11801 (I won't engage 
in the pretense of beginning my footnotes with 0 :-) )


[2] The idea that someone would use org-mode and not get "hooked" is 
paradoxically unimaginable.


--
Bo Grimes

Re: Website revamp?

[gyro funch]

Your website update is looking great!

A couple of comments:

- If materials are presented that are not relatively recent, it may
indicate to potential users a lack of project vitality.

- Because so many people these days are enticed by videos, I wonder if
links to a few selected, engaging videos could be made prominent on the
home page. I know that creating such a list could be difficult, but
perhaps some consensus could be reached on a few outstanding selections.

-gyro



On 8/4/2020 12:27 AM, TEC wrote:
> 
> Good to hear from you!
> 
> Eric S Fraga  writes:
>> I do like the animated images in the features page!
> 
> Glad you like them! I recently converted the static images to SVGs with
> the help of someone using Emacs27 w/ Cairo, would be nice go do
> something like an animated SVG in the future, but that's for (much)
> later :P
> 
>> I do wonder about the order of the topics within that page, e.g.
>> working with source code, although powerful, is probably not the lead
>> item for new users.  However, that's a minor point at this stage. 
> 
> Thanks for this feedback. I prioritised the source code blocks because:
> a) my impression is that to Comp/Data Sci people, they are one of /the/
> most    compelling features of Org-mode b) they're similar to elements
> people are familiar with (Jupyter    notebooks, R markdown), so the
> Comp/Data Sci segment of our    audience is already roughy familiar with
> part of their    capabilities
> I shifted the agenda/capture/clocking/etc. features down because
> a) they semantically seem like they should go together b) having them
> near the top pushes down too many other features too much, IMO
> 
> Absolutely worth considering the order, please share any further
> thoughts you may have :)
> 
>> More generally, can the column width for the text be a function of the
>> window width and have images scaled so that they are not wider than
>> the text column?  It should be possible to have mobile friendly
>> without making the columns too narrow for full desktop use.  The fact
>> that the images are much wider than the text makes the page look ugly,
>> in my opinion. 
> 
> The column width already is. I just find long lines undesirable. 50-80
> characters is the standard in publishing for a reason.
> 
> To quote from /The Elements of Typographic Style/,
>> Anything from 45 to 75 characters is widely regarded as a satisfactory
>> line length of line for a single-column page set in a serifed text
>> face in a text size. The 66-character line (counting both letters and
>> spaces) is widely regarded as ideal. For multiple-column work, a
>> better average is 40 to 50 characters. If the type is well set and
>> printed, lines of 85 or 90 characters will pose no problem in
>> discontinuous texts, such as bibliographies, or, with generous
>> leading, in footnotes. But even with generous leading, a line that
>> averages more than 75 or So characters is likely to be too long for
>> continuous reading. 
> 
> There's more to be said about line spacing and the reasons for this - if
> I recall correctly /A practical guide to typography/ (available online)
> goes over this.
> 
> I look forward to hearing any further comments you may have!
> 
> Timothy.
> 
> 



pEpkey.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Re: Website revamp?

[Bruce D'Arcus]

Right; shrink the banner.

I meant to say "smaller" rather than "small".

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 12:26 PM TEC  wrote:
>
>
> Bruce D'Arcus  writes:
>
> > On a large monitor, there's so much space that I think the features
> > content would best fit underneath a small banner.
>
> Shrink the banner. Right - that sounds like something to try!
>
> I messed with the CSS a little using browser devtools (with one or two
> unintended side-effects) to create a rough mock-up, and I like the result!
>
> As seen on my 27" monitor: https://i.imgur.com/zZUFlX3.png
>
> I'd be curious to know how that looks to you,
>
> Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Bruce D'Arcus  writes:

> On a large monitor, there's so much space that I think the features
> content would best fit underneath a small banner.

Shrink the banner. Right - that sounds like something to try!

I messed with the CSS a little using browser devtools (with one or two
unintended side-effects) to create a rough mock-up, and I like the result!

As seen on my 27" monitor: https://i.imgur.com/zZUFlX3.png

I'd be curious to know how that looks to you,

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Bruce D'Arcus]

On a large monitor, there's so much space that I think the features
content would best fit underneath a small banner.

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 12:12 PM TEC  wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for the feedback!
>
> Maxim Nikulin  writes:
>
> > 03.08.2020 12:11, TEC wrote:
> >>
> >> To see how orgmode.org currently appears, see
> >> https://i.imgur.com/XPFfBaB.png
> >
> > Sorry for negative (and maybe discouraging) feedback. I would
> > not mind if you just skip my complains since I am not a
> > contributor to org-mode.
>
> Please, share your thoughts!
>
> > Concerning the screenshot, when first impression, that
> > everything is broken and do not worth reading at all, is over,
> > in my opinion, the text makes much more sense than "innovative"
> > marketing stuff got priority on the demo of the new design. I
> > consider the list of tasks, that org mode could help with, is
> > the most important thing to attract new users. It should just be
> > properly formatted.
>
> Re content for the index page, my current thoughts are:
>  - Some sort of informative introductory paragraph
>  - List of most common applications of org - Note latest version,
>  and when it was released
>
> I also have a styled equivalent of the screenshot on the current
> site.
>
> These things just need to move from my mind, to the page :)
>
> Do let me know if you have any other specific ideas on content for
> the index.
>
> > It seems that new variant is too mobile-centric. On a 24in
> > monitor I expect something more than just a banner. There is
> > plenty of room for brief news related to new releases, for more
> > details of most important features (on the other hand I am
> > against arbitrary scaled screenshots with excessively huge
> > characters in comparison to surrounded text), etc. I am aware
> > that my taste is against of modern design trends.
>
> If you have specific suggestions on how I could smoothly work in a
> better design for the index on the desktop, I'd love to hear them.
> If you could pair any such suggestions with reference to my
> earlier thoughts* on the purpose of each page that will make it
> easier to glimpse your thought process, and how it compares to my
> own.
>
> \* see email in reply to Colin sent on Mon 03 Aug 07:53 UTC
>
> > A couple of remarks unrelated to new look but should be
> > addressed in the case of rework.
> >
> > I am surprised that Emacs is explicitly mentioned only in html
> > head title. The relation should be clear for new visitors.
>
> That's:
>  a) been removed from the head title. I couldn't find a browser
>  which would
> display the whole thing without chopping it off the last
> ~third
>  b) going to be mentioned prominently in the body, at least in my
>  current thoughts
>
> > As to installation, I believe that org-mode bundled with Emacs
> > is more than enough for first try. It is a shorter path to
> > become familiar with most prominent features just to start
> > editing of an .org file (or to download a prepared demo .org).
> > Getting the latest stable version could be a next step for the
> > hooked users.
>
> Are you saying that you find the current mention of Emacs in the
> instillation page works well? I'm currently just linking to Emacs.
> Looking at the page though, I think I should make a more prominent
> action to download Emacs.
>
> I love the idea of a demo org file! If anyone would like to help
> out with creating one by sending in contenders / snippets that
> would be brilliant!
>
> Even better - having two or three different demo files based on the use case 
> of
> the new user - e.g. programmer, author, organisation - or something like that.
>

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Bruce D'Arcus  writes:

> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:50 AM Maxim Nikulin  wrote:
>
>> It seems that new variant is too mobile-centric. On a 24in monitor I
>> expect something more than just a banner.
>
> I agree; it looked odd when I opened it on this 27-inch monitor.

Hmm. Sounds like this design could do with re-visiting. To quote from my recent
reply:

> If you have specific suggestions on how I could smoothly work in a better 
> design
> for the index on the desktop, I'd love to hear them. If you could pair any 
> such
> suggestions with reference to my earlier thoughts* on the purpose of each page
> that will make it easier to glimpse your thought process, and how it compares 
> to
> my own.
> 
> * see email in reply to Colin sent on Mon 03 Aug 07:53 UTC

Thanks for the feedback,

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Thanks for the feedback!

Maxim Nikulin  writes: 

03.08.2020 12:11, TEC wrote: 


To see how orgmode.org currently appears, see 
https://i.imgur.com/XPFfBaB.png 


Sorry for negative (and maybe discouraging) feedback. I would 
not mind if you just skip my complains since I am not a 
contributor to org-mode. 


Please, share your thoughts!

Concerning the screenshot, when first impression, that 
everything is broken and do not worth reading at all, is over, 
in my opinion, the text makes much more sense than "innovative" 
marketing stuff got priority on the demo of the new design. I 
consider the list of tasks, that org mode could help with, is 
the most important thing to attract new users. It should just be 
properly formatted. 


Re content for the index page, my current thoughts are:
- Some sort of informative introductory paragraph
- List of most common applications of org - Note latest version, 
and when it was released


I also have a styled equivalent of the screenshot on the current 
site.


These things just need to move from my mind, to the page :)

Do let me know if you have any other specific ideas on content for 
the index.


It seems that new variant is too mobile-centric. On a 24in 
monitor I expect something more than just a banner. There is 
plenty of room for brief news related to new releases, for more 
details of most important features (on the other hand I am 
against arbitrary scaled screenshots with excessively huge 
characters in comparison to surrounded text), etc. I am aware 
that my taste is against of modern design trends. 


If you have specific suggestions on how I could smoothly work in a 
better design for the index on the desktop, I'd love to hear them. 
If you could pair any such suggestions with reference to my 
earlier thoughts* on the purpose of each page that will make it 
easier to glimpse your thought process, and how it compares to my 
own.


\* see email in reply to Colin sent on Mon 03 Aug 07:53 UTC

A couple of remarks unrelated to new look but should be 
addressed in the case of rework. 

I am surprised that Emacs is explicitly mentioned only in html 
head title. The relation should be clear for new visitors. 


That's:
a) been removed from the head title. I couldn't find a browser 
which would 
   display the whole thing without chopping it off the last 
   ~third 
b) going to be mentioned prominently in the body, at least in my 
current thoughts


As to installation, I believe that org-mode bundled with Emacs 
is more than enough for first try. It is a shorter path to 
become familiar with most prominent features just to start 
editing of an .org file (or to download a prepared demo .org). 
Getting the latest stable version could be a next step for the 
hooked users.


Are you saying that you find the current mention of Emacs in the 
instillation page works well? I'm currently just linking to Emacs. 
Looking at the page though, I think I should make a more prominent 
action to download Emacs.


I love the idea of a demo org file! If anyone would like to help 
out with creating one by sending in contenders / snippets that 
would be brilliant!


Even better - having two or three different demo files based on the use case of
the new user - e.g. programmer, author, organisation - or something like that.

Re: Website revamp?

[Bruce D'Arcus]

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:50 AM Maxim Nikulin  wrote:

> It seems that new variant is too mobile-centric. On a 24in monitor I
> expect something more than just a banner.

I agree; it looked odd when I opened it on this 27-inch monitor.

Re: Website revamp?

[Maxim Nikulin]

03.08.2020 12:11, TEC wrote:


To see how orgmode.org currently appears, see
https://i.imgur.com/XPFfBaB.png


Sorry for negative (and maybe discouraging) feedback. I would not mind 
if you just skip my complains since I am not a contributor to org-mode.


Concerning the screenshot, when first impression, that everything is 
broken and do not worth reading at all, is over, in my opinion, the text 
makes much more sense than "innovative" marketing stuff got priority on 
the demo of the new design. I consider the list of tasks, that org mode 
could help with, is the most important thing to attract new users. It 
should just be properly formatted.


It seems that new variant is too mobile-centric. On a 24in monitor I 
expect something more than just a banner. There is plenty of room for 
brief news related to new releases, for more details of most important
features (on the other hand I am against arbitrary scaled screenshots 
with excessively huge characters in comparison to surrounded text), etc. 
I am aware that my taste is against of modern design trends.


A couple of remarks unrelated to new look but should be addressed in the 
case of rework.


I am surprised that Emacs is explicitly mentioned only in html head 
title. The relation should be clear for new visitors.


As to installation, I believe that org-mode bundled with Emacs is more 
than enough for first try. It is a shorter path to become familiar
with most prominent features just to start editing of an .org file (or 
to download a prepared demo .org). Getting the latest stable version

could be a next step for the hooked users.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Good to hear from you!

Eric S Fraga  writes: 


I do like the animated images in the features page!


Glad you like them! I recently converted the static images to SVGs 
with the help of someone using Emacs27 w/ Cairo, would be nice go 
do something like an animated SVG in the future, but that's for 
(much) later :P


I do wonder about 
the order of the topics within that page, e.g. working with 
source code, although powerful, is probably not the lead item 
for new users.  However, that's a minor point at this stage. 


Thanks for this feedback. I prioritised the source code blocks 
because:
a) my impression is that to Comp/Data Sci people, they are one of 
/the/ most 
   compelling features of Org-mode 
b) they're similar to elements people are familiar with (Jupyter 
   notebooks, R markdown), so the Comp/Data Sci segment of our 
   audience is already roughy familiar with part of their 
   capabilities 


I shifted the agenda/capture/clocking/etc. features down because
a) they semantically seem like they should go together b) having 
them near the top pushes down too many other features too much, 
IMO


Absolutely worth considering the order, please share any further 
thoughts you may have :)


More generally, can the column width for the text be a function 
of the window width and have images scaled so that they are not 
wider than the text column?  It should be possible to have 
mobile friendly without making the columns too narrow for full 
desktop use.  The fact that the images are much wider than the 
text makes the page look ugly, in my opinion. 


The column width already is. I just find long lines undesirable. 
50-80 characters is the standard in publishing for a reason.


To quote from /The Elements of Typographic Style/,
Anything from 45 to 75 characters is widely regarded as a 
satisfactory line length of line for a single-column page set in 
a serifed text face in a text size. The 66-character line 
(counting both letters and spaces) is widely regarded as ideal. 
For multiple-column work, a better average is 40 to 50 
characters. If the type is well set and printed, lines of 85 or 
90 characters will pose no problem in discontinuous texts, such 
as bibliographies, or, with generous leading, in footnotes. But 
even with generous leading, a line that averages more than 75 or 
So characters is likely to be too long for continuous reading. 


There's more to be said about line spacing and the reasons for 
this - if I recall correctly /A practical guide to typography/ 
(available online) goes over this.


I look forward to hearing any further comments you may have!

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Eric S Fraga]

On Monday,  3 Aug 2020 at 10:03, to...@tuxteam.de wrote:
> Emacs should run fine on PostmarketOS [1] [2]. Thus Org, too.

Emacs runs perfectly fine on Android via termux and org works as well (as does 
gnus!).

But the issue is the keyboard.

-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.3.7-682-geac255

Re: Website revamp?

[Eric S Fraga]

I do like the animated images in the features page!  I do wonder about
the order of the topics within that page, e.g. working with source code,
although powerful, is probably not the lead item for new
users.  However, that's a minor point at this stage.

More generally, can the column width for the text be a function of the
window width and have images scaled so that they are not wider than the
text column?  It should be possible to have mobile friendly without
making the columns too narrow for full desktop use.  The fact that the
images are much wider than the text makes the page look ugly, in my
opinion.

thank you,
eric

-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.3.7-682-geac255

RE: Website revamp?

[Gustav Wikström]

Hi TEC,

Just wanted to add one datapoint here. I think this effort your putting down is 
commendable and deserves many +1's.

Reading about something ofc happen on devices other than where the software in 
the end is installed. Thus, I agree fully with what you write below!

Your draft is already a big improvement and I, for one, hope it can go into 
"release" as soon as possible. Even if it's not "perfect". Because nothing is, 
especially not regarding design, where facts are few and opinions are many.

Thank you.

/Gustav 

> -Original Message-
> From: Emacs-orgmode  On Behalf
> Of TEC
> Sent: den 3 augusti 2020 07:11
> To: Colin Baxter 
> Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Website revamp?
> 
> 
> Colin Baxter  writes:
> 
> >> TEC   writes:
> >> - The site is now more mobile friendly, the navbar now has a
> >
> > Why? How many users are installing org-mode on their 'phones - smart
> > or otherwise?
> 
> Zero, I expect :P
> 
> However, I don't think that's the question we should be asking.
> Consider someone tweeting about org-mode, the question then is:
>   how many people use twitter on their phones?
> 
> Likewise, if someone wants to share a org-mode with a friend, and sends them
> a link - whether it be by email, sms, whatsapp, messenger, or telegram:
> what's the chance that they'll take a peek oh their phones?
> 
> Of course we don't exactly have any hard answers to these questions, but I'd
> wager the answer is enough to warrant a little bit of effort to make the
> mobile experience not-garbage. To see how orgmode.org currently appears, see
> https://i.imgur.com/XPFfBaB.png
> 
> IMO that's downright off-putting --- and I say that intending no criticism
> to Carsten or Bastien, in 2012 mobile design simple wasn't a priority.
> 
> Moreover, we can improve the mobile experience with no compromise to the
> desktop
> --- so why wouldn't we? :D
> 
> I hope this fleshes out my motivation for improving the mobile experience :)
> 
> Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Colin Baxter  writes: 

It seems to have the usual vertical monotone blocks, commonly 
seen in mobile sites. These may be necessary for the small 
screen but represent to me a retrograde development in web-site 
design.


Ah yes, the big banner on the index page. I think I can see your 
point of view --- the current index is far more informative. 
Ultimately though the decision to use a banner wasn't just 
triggered by mobile considerations, but a little re-think about 
the structure and purpose of the website.


As I see it, the desirable purpose of the 'main' pages is roughly 
as follows:
- index :: attention grabber - features :: capture interest, 
entice to try - releases :: see what's changed recently - install 
:: how to get started - documentation :: dig into the details - 
contribute :: encourage to give back to the project 

With those goals in mind, I see a large banner on the index 
declaring (effectively) that "org is great" as being in line with 
the above UX.


Of course, my criticism is unimportant since you are doing the 
hard work - not me.


Quite the contrary! If there's anything I want more of with this 
effort (appart from general help) it's criticism/feedback. As 
you've pointed out it's (effectively) just me working on this: so 
hearing other people's thoughts is emminently desirable. 

Would it be possible to have two sites: one for display on a 
desktop and another for mobile use? Perhaps not. 


Effectively, yes. You could have CSS as follows:

#+BEGIN_SRC css @media(min-width:851px) { 
   /* desktop style */ 
} @media(max-width:850px) { 
   /* mobile style */ 
} #+END_SRC


Good luck. 


Thanks :) I hope this can receive Bastien/Carsten's blessing and 
be used for the main site sooner rather than later.


All the best,

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[tomas]

On Mon, Aug 03, 2020 at 01:11:24PM +0800, TEC wrote:
> 
> Colin Baxter  writes:
> 
> >> TEC   writes:
> >> - The site is now more mobile friendly, the navbar now has a
> >
> > Why? How many users are installing org-mode on their 'phones - smart or
> > otherwise? 
> 
> Zero, I expect :P

Emacs should run fine on PostmarketOS [1] [2]. Thus Org, too.

Cheers
[1] https://postmarketos.org/
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PostmarketOS
-- t


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Website revamp?

[Colin Baxter]

Dear Timothy,

> TEC   writes:

- Snip --

> Of course we don't exactly have any hard answers to these
> questions, but I'd wager the answer is enough to warrant a little
> bit of effort to make the mobile experience not-garbage. To see
> how orgmode.org currently appears, see
> https://i.imgur.com/XPFfBaB.png

It seems to have the usual vertical monotone blocks, commonly seen in
mobile sites. These may be necessary for the small screen but represent
to me a retrograde development in web-site design. Of course, my
criticism is unimportant since you are doing the hard work - not me.

Would it be possible to have two sites: one for display on a desktop and
another for mobile use? Perhaps not.

Good luck.

Colin Baxter

-- 
Colin Baxter
URL: http://www.Colin-Baxter.com

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Colin Baxter  writes:

>> TEC   writes:
>> - The site is now more mobile friendly, the navbar now has a
>
> Why? How many users are installing org-mode on their 'phones - smart or
> otherwise? 

Zero, I expect :P

However, I don't think that's the question we should be asking.
Consider someone tweeting about org-mode, the question then is:
  how many people use twitter on their phones?

Likewise, if someone wants to share a org-mode with a friend, and sends them a
link - whether it be by email, sms, whatsapp, messenger, or telegram: what's the
chance that they'll take a peek oh their phones?

Of course we don't exactly have any hard answers to these questions, but I'd
wager the answer is enough to warrant a little bit of effort to make the mobile
experience not-garbage. To see how orgmode.org currently appears, see
https://i.imgur.com/XPFfBaB.png

IMO that's downright off-putting --- and I say that intending no criticism to
Carsten or Bastien, in 2012 mobile design simple wasn't a priority.

Moreover, we can improve the mobile experience with no compromise to the desktop
--- so why wouldn't we? :D

I hope this fleshes out my motivation for improving the mobile experience :)

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Colin Baxter]

> TEC   writes:

> Another update :)

> - For inspection, the WIP-code can now be found on github:
> https://github.com/tecosaur/orgwebsite.

> - The site is now more mobile friendly, the navbar now has a

Why? How many users are installing org-mode on their 'phones - smart or
otherwise? 


Colin Baxter.

-- 
Colin Baxter
URL: http://www.Colin-Baxter.com
-
GnuPG fingerprint: 68A8 799C 0230 16E7 BF68  2A27 BBFA 2492 91F5 41C8

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Another update :)

- For inspection, the WIP-code can now be found on github: 
https://github.com/tecosaur/orgwebsite.


- The site is now more mobile friendly, the navbar now has a 
burger state  - The features page has seen a revamp in style and 
content  Please check it out and give me feedback on the current 
state of affairs!


Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

The effort continues!

To give an idea of what's changed, here's a commit log:

Unmerged into origin/master (19)
- master Replace header generic org description with quote - 
Remove jQuery, do smooth scrolling with CSS - Add open grabh meta 
tags - Don't eval src blocks on export, by default - Org table 
auto-formatting - Start using a setupfile for common properties - 
Change main banner style - bigger and greener - Improve mobile 
experience - Tweak banners - Use svg unicorn in navbar - Make 
font less thin - Place nav on top of page - Change link colours - 
Autoformatting - (Re)add quotes script - Add banner to index - 
Tweak implementation of body padding in css - Add navbar - Start 
using SCSS 

Feedback / issue reporting is appreciated :) just visit 
http://orgmode.tecosaur.com/ for a preview. I've mainly focused on 
the index page, next up is features.


Hope you're all having a nice weekend,

Timothy.   Russell Adams  writes: 

I wouldn't recommend anyone use Discord so you won't find me 
there, much less Facebook or the other horrid scourges devouring 
the internet. As an OSS project, I think Org's users should stay 
on Freenode. 

IRC isn't difficult, perhaps you should try it sometime. There's 
plenty of clients, and even one inside Emacs (ERC). 


Good news on that front - Yesterday I spent the evening getting 
Circe going, so I'm now on #org-mode, if you care to chat :)


Scott Randby wrote:

There is one thing, something which has nothing to do with the 
new design or the old design, that has sort of bugged me for a 
long time though. That thing is the advertisement for "The Org 
Mode 7 Reference Manual." Org is now at version 9.3.7, there 
have been significant changes to Org since version 7, and the 
manual isn't available anymore (as stated on the page). 
Potential and new users might be confused by the advertisement. 
Perhaps there is another graphic that can replace the graphic of 
the cover of the printed reference manual. 


I'll get around to content in a bit, maybe today, maybe a few days.

Re: Website revamp?

[Russell Adams]

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 01:57:27AM +0800, TEC wrote:
> Ok, I had a bit of time so I had a quick look and got started.
> I decided to start off with the big flashy stuff --- navbar and
> banner.
>
> I need to think about how I'm doing the styling more. To fit with
> the default org-export I need to work out what sort of CSS hackery
> I want to go with, at the moment it's with negative margins in a
> css calc(...) using variables.
>
> Anyway, barely started but you can take a peek here ---
> http://orgmode.tecosaur.com/

First impression is that it's nice, but I'm afraid I can't help you with your
CSS.

> Hmmm, I'm not exactly an IRC user, but I'll see about that.  In the meantime,
> if any of you have discord I'm quite contactable there.  You can find me on
> the Doom Emacs discord :) https://discord.gg/qvGgnVx

I wouldn't recommend anyone use Discord so you won't find me there, much less
Facebook or the other horrid scourges devouring the internet. As an OSS project,
I think Org's users should stay on Freenode.

IRC isn't difficult, perhaps you should try it sometime. There's plenty of
clients, and even one inside Emacs (ERC).

--
Russell Adamsrlad...@adamsinfoserv.com

PGP Key ID: 0x1160DCB3   http://www.adamsinfoserv.com/

Fingerprint:1723 D8CA 4280 1EC9 557F  66E8 1154 E018 1160 DCB3

Re: Website revamp?

[Scott Randby]

On 7/30/20 1:57 PM, TEC wrote> Ok, I had a bit of time so I had a quick look 
and got started.
> I decided to start off with the big flashy stuff --- navbar and banner.
> 
> I need to think about how I'm doing the styling more. To fit with the default 
> org-export I need to work out what sort of CSS hackery I want to go with, at 
> the moment it's with negative margins in a css calc(...) using variables.
> 
> Anyway, barely started but you can take a peek here --- 
> http://orgmode.tecosaur.com/
> 
> Let me know what you all think :) 

This is a very nice start in my opinion. There is one thing, something which 
has nothing to do with the new design or the old design, that has sort of 
bugged me for a long time though. That thing is the advertisement for "The Org 
Mode 7 Reference Manual." Org is now at version 9.3.7, there have been 
significant changes to Org since version 7, and the manual isn't available 
anymore (as stated on the page). Potential and new users might be confused by 
the advertisement. Perhaps there is another graphic that can replace the 
graphic of the cover of the printed reference manual.

Scott Randby

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Ok, I had a bit of time so I had a quick look and got started.
I decided to start off with the big flashy stuff --- navbar and 
banner.


I need to think about how I'm doing the styling more. To fit with 
the default org-export I need to work out what sort of CSS hackery 
I want to go with, at the moment it's with negative margins in a 
css calc(...) using variables.


Anyway, barely started but you can take a peek here --- 
http://orgmode.tecosaur.com/


Let me know what you all think :)  Russell Adams 
 writes: 
If you want instant feedback you might consider showing off on 
IRC (irc.freenode.net #org-mode). 


Hmmm, I'm not exactly an IRC user, but I'll see about that.
In the meantime, if any of you have discord I'm quite contactable 
there.
You can find me on the Doom Emacs discord :) 
https://discord.gg/qvGgnVx


-

What I've done to produce the change you see:
- add a nav element - add a div#banner element 


total: ~30 lines of html, 80 lines of CSS

This should look fine with EWW etc. too

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Russell Adams]

TEC,

If you want instant feedback you might consider showing off on IRC
(irc.freenode.net #org-mode).

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:19:28PM +0800, TEC wrote:
> Thanks for giving me your thoughts on the idea :)
> Your responses have lead me to think that this may lead somewhere.
>
> Russell Adams  writes:
>
> > My feedback is that personally I don't care about trendy web
> > pages. I agree with you that adding JS to simple pages makes
> > them horrible.
>
> Oh absolutely. I don't want any of those JS-laden pages which load
> with:
> "We're sorry but this doesn't work properly without JavaScript
> enabled. Please enable it to continue."
> Urgh. No thanks.
>
> For org, a simple static page of HTML + CSS seems perfect, with
> perhaps the odd feature using JS - like copy code block buttons.
>
> > I would suggest though if you can use an Org-based html theme to
> > improve the site, that might be useful. It's always nice to be
> > able to self-create instead of using other tools.
>
> That would be ideal IMO. I'll see if I run into issues with an
> org-export based site.
>
> > I recently tried a read-the-docs theme exported from Org and
> > found it very nice, and nearly zero difficulty to integrate.
> > That surprised me.
>
> 
> If you want another example, check out my config ;) ---
> https://tecosaur.github.io/emacs-config/config.html
> It's less light weight than what I'm conceptualising, but it's
> just produced by org-html-export-to-html ... with a few tweaks
> (ok, a lot).
> 
>
> > Getting an Org site theme into core that'd do that, and make the
> > website export from that template could be a good idea. Or if
> > it's already done (I beg ignorance), perhaps updating that
> > template could be a good use of your time?
>
> I think this is what I'll look into first (pending Bastien's
> response, of course).
>
> Amin Bandali  writes:
>
> > Hello,
> Hi :)
>
> > While we wait for Bastien and others to chime in, per your
> > question in your original proposal email, if you have not seen
> > it already, the repository containing the sources for the
> > current Org website seems to be at
> > .
>
> I wasn't aware of that! Thank you very much for bringing it to my
> attention.
>
> > If you have some time, perhaps consider making a quick demo of
> > one revamped page, to give folks an idea of what sort of changes
> > you imagine?
>
> I may just have a go at whipping up a 'revamped' index page, I'll
> let you all know how that goes.
>
> > I think the overall design of the Org website is fine, but it
> > could use well-thought out enhancements to make browsing around
> > and discovering things easier.  That said, I personally wouldn't
> > be opposed to a bit of a revamp, if the site continues to work
> > well without JS and continue to be accessible in text-based
> > browsers (like EWW and Lynx).
>
> As I said earlier, I see no reason for the Org site to be much
> more than a simple static page ... just in need of a bit of
> massaging into a more aesthetically pleasing shape.
>
> -
>
> While this may seem like a relatively minor pursuit in the scheme
> of things, it is (or at least was in my case) the landing page for
> the feature that can draw one into Emacs.
>
> For the sake of curious individuals who aren't sure what to
> expect, I think it's worth some effort to make their first
> impression lean more towards "Org is a novel and exciting format,
> ahead of it's time" than "Org is some old and crufty format that
> hasn't received much love" :P
>
> While obviously that goes far beyond the styling of orgmode.org, I
> do honestly think that it plays a part.
>
> All the best,
>
> Timothy.
>


--
Russell Adamsrlad...@adamsinfoserv.com

PGP Key ID: 0x1160DCB3   http://www.adamsinfoserv.com/

Fingerprint:1723 D8CA 4280 1EC9 557F  66E8 1154 E018 1160 DCB3

Re: Website revamp?

[Amin Bandali]

Hello Timothy,

TEC  writes:

> Hello Russell, Amin,
>
> Thanks for giving me your thoughts on the idea :)
> Your responses have lead me to think that this may lead somewhere.
>

:-)

[...]
>
> Amin Bandali  writes:  
>> Hello, 
> Hi :)
>
>> While we wait for Bastien and others to chime in, per your question
>> in your original proposal email, if you have not seen it already,
>> the repository containing the sources for the current Org website
>> seems to be at .
>
> I wasn't aware of that! Thank you very much for bringing it to my
> attention.
>

You're very welcome!

>
>> If you have some time, perhaps consider making a quick demo of one
>> revamped page, to give folks an idea of what sort of changes you
>> imagine? 
>
> I may just have a go at whipping up a 'revamped' index page, I'll let
> you all know how that goes.
>

Please do, and thanks in advance for working on it.  Looking forward to
seeing it what comes of it. :-)

>
>> I think the overall design of the Org website is fine, but it could
>> use well-thought out enhancements to make browsing around and
>> discovering things easier.  That said, I personally wouldn't be
>> opposed to a bit of a revamp, if the site continues to work well
>> without JS and continue to be accessible in text-based browsers
>> (like EWW and Lynx). 
>
> As I said earlier, I see no reason for the Org site to be much more
> than a simple static page ... just in need of a bit of massaging into
> a more aesthetically pleasing shape.
>
> -
>
> While this may seem like a relatively minor pursuit in the scheme of
> things, it is (or at least was in my case) the landing page for the
> feature that can draw one into Emacs.
>
> For the sake of curious individuals who aren't sure what to expect, I
> think it's worth some effort to make their first impression lean more
> towards "Org is a novel and exciting format, ahead of it's time" than
> "Org is some old and crufty format that hasn't received much love" :P
>
> While obviously that goes far beyond the styling of orgmode.org, I do
> honestly think that it plays a part.
>

+1.

Speaking of Emacs, I quite like the design Nicolas Petton did for
 a few years back.  It has a few
different templates, which I think lend themselves well to pages with
various purposes.  For instance, I used one to create the ERC page
 a while ago.  Perhaps
something carrying some resemblance and familiarity of the Emacs web
pages would be a good idea to start with?

>
> All the best,
>
> Timothy.

Cheers,
amin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Website revamp?

[Bruce D'Arcus]

FWIW, I think this is a great idea!

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020, 10:45 AM TEC  wrote:

>
> Hello Russell, Amin,
>
> Thanks for giving me your thoughts on the idea :)
> Your responses have lead me to think that this may lead somewhere.
>
> Russell Adams  writes:
>
> > My feedback is that personally I don't care about trendy web
> > pages. I agree with you that adding JS to simple pages makes
> > them horrible.
>
> Oh absolutely. I don't want any of those JS-laden pages which load
> with:
> "We're sorry but this doesn't work properly without JavaScript
> enabled. Please enable it to continue."
> Urgh. No thanks.
>
> For org, a simple static page of HTML + CSS seems perfect, with
> perhaps the odd feature using JS - like copy code block buttons.
>
> > I would suggest though if you can use an Org-based html theme to
> > improve the site, that might be useful. It's always nice to be
> > able to self-create instead of using other tools.
>
> That would be ideal IMO. I'll see if I run into issues with an
> org-export based site.
>
> > I recently tried a read-the-docs theme exported from Org and
> > found it very nice, and nearly zero difficulty to integrate.
> > That surprised me.
>
> 
> If you want another example, check out my config ;) ---
> https://tecosaur.github.io/emacs-config/config.html
> It's less light weight than what I'm conceptualising, but it's
> just produced by org-html-export-to-html ... with a few tweaks
> (ok, a lot).
> 
>
> > Getting an Org site theme into core that'd do that, and make the
> > website export from that template could be a good idea. Or if
> > it's already done (I beg ignorance), perhaps updating that
> > template could be a good use of your time?
>
> I think this is what I'll look into first (pending Bastien's
> response, of course).
>
> Amin Bandali  writes:
>
> > Hello,
> Hi :)
>
> > While we wait for Bastien and others to chime in, per your
> > question in your original proposal email, if you have not seen
> > it already, the repository containing the sources for the
> > current Org website seems to be at
> > .
>
> I wasn't aware of that! Thank you very much for bringing it to my
> attention.
>
> > If you have some time, perhaps consider making a quick demo of
> > one revamped page, to give folks an idea of what sort of changes
> > you imagine?
>
> I may just have a go at whipping up a 'revamped' index page, I'll
> let you all know how that goes.
>
> > I think the overall design of the Org website is fine, but it
> > could use well-thought out enhancements to make browsing around
> > and discovering things easier.  That said, I personally wouldn't
> > be opposed to a bit of a revamp, if the site continues to work
> > well without JS and continue to be accessible in text-based
> > browsers (like EWW and Lynx).
>
> As I said earlier, I see no reason for the Org site to be much
> more than a simple static page ... just in need of a bit of
> massaging into a more aesthetically pleasing shape.
>
> -
>
> While this may seem like a relatively minor pursuit in the scheme
> of things, it is (or at least was in my case) the landing page for
> the feature that can draw one into Emacs.
>
> For the sake of curious individuals who aren't sure what to
> expect, I think it's worth some effort to make their first
> impression lean more towards "Org is a novel and exciting format,
> ahead of it's time" than "Org is some old and crufty format that
> hasn't received much love" :P
>
> While obviously that goes far beyond the styling of orgmode.org, I
> do honestly think that it plays a part.
>
> All the best,
>
> Timothy.
>
>

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Hello Russell, Amin,

Thanks for giving me your thoughts on the idea :)
Your responses have lead me to think that this may lead somewhere.

Russell Adams  writes: 

My feedback is that personally I don't care about trendy web 
pages. I agree with you that adding JS to simple pages makes 
them horrible. 


Oh absolutely. I don't want any of those JS-laden pages which load 
with:
"We're sorry but this doesn't work properly without JavaScript 
enabled. Please enable it to continue."

Urgh. No thanks.

For org, a simple static page of HTML + CSS seems perfect, with 
perhaps the odd feature using JS - like copy code block buttons.


I would suggest though if you can use an Org-based html theme to 
improve the site, that might be useful. It's always nice to be 
able to self-create instead of using other tools. 


That would be ideal IMO. I'll see if I run into issues with an 
org-export based site.


I recently tried a read-the-docs theme exported from Org and 
found it very nice, and nearly zero difficulty to integrate. 
That surprised me. 



If you want another example, check out my config ;) --- 
https://tecosaur.github.io/emacs-config/config.html
It's less light weight than what I'm conceptualising, but it's 
just produced by org-html-export-to-html ... with a few tweaks 
(ok, a lot).



Getting an Org site theme into core that'd do that, and make the 
website export from that template could be a good idea. Or if 
it's already done (I beg ignorance), perhaps updating that 
template could be a good use of your time?


I think this is what I'll look into first (pending Bastien's 
response, of course).


Amin Bandali  writes: 

Hello, 

Hi :)

While we wait for Bastien and others to chime in, per your 
question in your original proposal email, if you have not seen 
it already, the repository containing the sources for the 
current Org website seems to be at 
.


I wasn't aware of that! Thank you very much for bringing it to my 
attention.


If you have some time, perhaps consider making a quick demo of 
one revamped page, to give folks an idea of what sort of changes 
you imagine? 


I may just have a go at whipping up a 'revamped' index page, I'll 
let you all know how that goes.


I think the overall design of the Org website is fine, but it 
could use well-thought out enhancements to make browsing around 
and discovering things easier.  That said, I personally wouldn't 
be opposed to a bit of a revamp, if the site continues to work 
well without JS and continue to be accessible in text-based 
browsers (like EWW and Lynx). 


As I said earlier, I see no reason for the Org site to be much 
more than a simple static page ... just in need of a bit of 
massaging into a more aesthetically pleasing shape.


-

While this may seem like a relatively minor pursuit in the scheme 
of things, it is (or at least was in my case) the landing page for 
the feature that can draw one into Emacs.


For the sake of curious individuals who aren't sure what to 
expect, I think it's worth some effort to make their first 
impression lean more towards "Org is a novel and exciting format, 
ahead of it's time" than "Org is some old and crufty format that 
hasn't received much love" :P


While obviously that goes far beyond the styling of orgmode.org, I 
do honestly think that it plays a part.


All the best,

Timothy.

Re: Website revamp?

[Amin Bandali]

Hello,

TEC  writes:

> Hello again,
>
> I thought I'd just bump this in the hope of a response, since in the
> six weeks since my original email I haven't heard anything.
>
> Just to re-iterate the central question:
> Bastien, would you be open to a website revamp? What are your
> thoughts? 
>
> As before, generally interested in thoughts on the idea :)
>
> Timothy.

While we wait for Bastien and others to chime in, per your question in
your original proposal email, if you have not seen it already, the
repository containing the sources for the current Org website seems to
be at .  If you have some time,
perhaps consider making a quick demo of one revamped page, to give folks
an idea of what sort of changes you imagine?

I think the overall design of the Org website is fine, but it could use
well-thought out enhancements to make browsing around and discovering
things easier.  That said, I personally wouldn't be opposed to a bit of
a revamp, if the site continues to work well without JS and continue to
be accessible in text-based browsers (like EWW and Lynx).


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Website revamp?

[Russell Adams]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:00:28PM +0800, TEC wrote:
> As before, generally interested in thoughts on the idea :)

My feedback is that personally I don't care about trendy web pages. I agree with
you that adding JS to simple pages makes them horrible.

I would suggest though if you can use an Org-based html theme to improve the
site, that might be useful. It's always nice to be able to self-create instead
of using other tools.

I recently tried a read-the-docs theme exported from Org and found it very nice,
and nearly zero difficulty to integrate. That surprised me.

Getting an Org site theme into core that'd do that, and make the website export
from that template could be a good idea. Or if it's already done (I beg
ignorance), perhaps updating that template could be a good use of your time?


--
Russell Adamsrlad...@adamsinfoserv.com

PGP Key ID: 0x1160DCB3   http://www.adamsinfoserv.com/

Fingerprint:1723 D8CA 4280 1EC9 557F  66E8 1154 E018 1160 DCB3

Re: Website revamp?

[TEC]

Hello again,

I thought I'd just bump this in the hope of a response, since in 
the six weeks since my original email I haven't heard anything.


Just to re-iterate the central question:
Bastien, would you be open to a website revamp? What are your 
thoughts? 


As before, generally interested in thoughts on the idea :)

Timothy.