-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Rogue gmail.com> writes:
>> Jakub, you are comparing how the widget looks in Firefox 3 alone. What
>> about other browsers? What if the native widgets in those other browsers
>> look terrible?
>
> The main 2 browser engines in F
Rogue gmail.com> writes:
> Jakub, you are comparing how the widget looks in Firefox 3 alone. What
> about other browsers? What if the native widgets in those other browsers
> look terrible?
The main 2 browser engines in Fedora are:
* Gecko - for everything using this, the widgets will look just a
It's not our problem, if browser renders widgets ugly.
We should provide native buttons or buttons with eye-candy bg.
2007/12/29, Rogue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> > Firefox3 provides beautiful native GTK widgets, so w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> Firefox3 provides beautiful native GTK widgets, so we shouldn't provide
> CSS for them.
>
The idea of CSS styling of the widgets is to ensure that the widgets
look the same across different browsers.
Jakub, you are com
Well, Firefox !=< 3 sucks a little bit.
Dnia 26-12-2007, śro o godzinie 12:47 -0600, Michael Beckwith pisze:
> I'm apparently blind, you're unclear with what you say. From a
> personal standpoint, when someone lists some terms with any reference
> to google, they mean to do searching, not look at
I'm apparently blind, you're unclear with what you say. From a personal
standpoint, when someone lists some terms with any reference to google,
they mean to do searching, not look at the buttons on the page. Should
have clarified.
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
You're blind... Google.com has nat
Firefox3 provides beautiful native GTK widgets, so we shouldn't provide
CSS for them.
Dnia 26-12-2007, śro o godzinie 09:35 +0100, Martin Sourada pisze:
> On Wed, 2007-12-26 at 01:38 +0100, Michael Beckwith wrote:
> > Why should I do a google search for something you're arguing for?
> > I don't h
You're blind... Google.com has native widgets!
Dnia 25-12-2007, wto o godzinie 18:38 -0600, Michael Beckwith pisze:
> Why should I do a google search for something you're arguing for? I
> don't have a problem with what I'm seeing when I visit the page. Just
> for the sake of not arguing, I did do
On Wed, 2007-12-26 at 01:38 +0100, Michael Beckwith wrote:
> Why should I do a google search for something you're arguing for?
> I don't have a problem with what I'm seeing when I visit the page.
> Just for the sake of not arguing, I did do a google search for
> both "native widgets" and didn't
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't know who made CSS for fpo, but he should know, that native
> widgets look better than rectangular ugly ones...
>
> Especially when Firefox 3 is gonna arrive very quickly.
FWIW, - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/ShowUs
Why should I do a google search for something you're arguing for? I
don't have a problem with what I'm seeing when I visit the page. Just
for the sake of not arguing, I did do a google search for both "native
widgets" and didn't find any sort of examples of what I was asking for.
Maybe I'm just
Google.com - native widgets.
Dnia 25-12-2007, wto o godzinie 15:58 -0600, Michael Beckwith pisze:
> Actually, Jakub, could you do me a favor and link to a page or image of
> the type of form styling you would like to see?
>
> ___
> Fedora-art-list mail
Actually, Jakub, could you do me a favor and link to a page or image of
the type of form styling you would like to see?
___
Fedora-art-list mailing list
Fedora-art-list@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
A lot of web2.0 styling and appearance relies on curved edges, rounded
corners, lots of gradients, glossy buttons, etc. Your complaint is about
square "ugly" form buttons.
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
What styling form has to do with Web2.0? What you're talking about,
man?!
Dnia 25-12-2007, w
What styling form has to do with Web2.0? What you're talking about,
man?!
Dnia 25-12-2007, wto o godzinie 13:16 -0600, Michael Beckwith pisze:
> FP.org is not a Web 2.0centric website. The most important thing for
> it to do is present information about Fedora. If you really want to
> have things
FP.org is not a Web 2.0centric website. The most important thing for it
to do is present information about Fedora. If you really want to have
things with the form change, contact the right mailing list and appeal
your case to them.
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
You don't understand. Rectangula
You don't understand. Rectangular widgets, non-native are ugly and
they're making websites looking more out-of-the-box, what's wrong.
Dnia 25-12-2007, wto o godzinie 12:23 -0600, Michael Beckwith pisze:
> I see nothing wrong with styling it for those who have support for it.
> It's a web accessabi
I see nothing wrong with styling it for those who have support for it.
It's a web accessability thing. Ability to style it and see a nice
looking form, or if your browser doesn't support it, then it still gets
form controls with the universal default which still allows it to be
useable. If your
Exactly that widgets should not be styled.
Dnia 25-12-2007, wto o godzinie 12:06 -0600, Michael Beckwith pisze:
> Well, you can do the appealing to the people that be that dictate the
> default appearance of any sort of basic form appearance for forms.
> It's nothing that the art or the website te
Well, you can do the appealing to the people that be that dictate the
default appearance of any sort of basic form appearance for forms. It's
nothing that the art or the website team have anything to do with. Until
you can appeal to the people that set this, you can either use a browser
that su
But it doesn't change the fact. Form styling (not the alignment, the
appearance css part) MUST be removed or changed to non-rectangular
(rectangles were nice in win9x epoch).
Dnia 24-12-2007, pon o godzinie 23:53 +, Kevin Kofler pisze:
> Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek gmail.com> writes:
> > Konqueror
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek gmail.com> writes:
> Konqueror doesn't support styled forms.
And I'd say that's a good thing, for the exact reason you describe. I haven't
tried the KDE 4 version yet though, they might have "fixed" it.
Kevin Kofler
___
Mine browser doesn't suck, silly.
Konqueror doesn't support styled forms. Run Firefox 2 and then Firefox
3.
FF2 - ugly non-gtk widgets on websites.
FF3 - beautiful gtk widgets on websites and those rectangular piece
of... rectangle.
Dnia 24-12-2007, pon o godzinie 23:01 +, Kevin Kofler pisze
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek gmail.com> writes:
> I don't know who made CSS for fpo, but he should know, that native
> widgets look better than rectangular ugly ones...
Could it be that your browser sucks? ;-) Konqueror is showing me only native
form widgets on fedoraproject.org.
Kevin Kofler
Concerns like this should go to the fedora-websites-list
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
Hi,
I don't know who made CSS for fpo, but he should know, that native
widgets look better than rectangular ugly ones...
Especially when Firefox 3 is gonna arrive very quickly.
---
Hi,
I don't know who made CSS for fpo, but he should know, that native
widgets look better than rectangular ugly ones...
Especially when Firefox 3 is gonna arrive very quickly.
--
______
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek/ _|___ __| |___ _ _ __
26 matches
Mail list logo
