Hi,
I took a look at the mobile styling, and you can easily improve it by doing two things: The first is adding `<meta name="viewport" content="initial-scale=1">` to the <head> of every page. That should get the initial zoom level right. Then you can, on the body, use `max-width: ...` instead of `width: ...` to make the pages a proper width on every device. The only real problem then left is the fact that every menu, or set of links, is a table. That makes a couple of things look a bit bad on smaller screens, but nothing too horrible. (The biggest issue is that part of the `[<][>]...` menu looks weird because the '[' and ']' are sometimes on different lines than the link.) Overall this is a great improvement over the previous non-styling. The smaller width improves readability by a lot, though as Mehul said it does leave a lot of white space. There are always details on which we're going to disagree (I'd pick a different font, like Charter[1]) but overall this is a wonderful improvement. [1]: [1]http://practicaltypography.com/charter.html -- Joram On Thu, Sep 11, 2014, at 06:25 PM, Mehul Sanghvi wrote: Hi Dave, Yes I do read it on a mobile device. I also read it on the desktop which in my case is my ThinkPad T430 with a 15" screen. I keep the windows full-screen, including the browser. I've attached screenshots to give an idea of how things look on my screen. As you can see its a lot of space wasted on either side. I usually keep 10% as the margins on either side. That way its still centred, but not that much waste of real-estate. That's just my personal style. I myself am not very good with CSS, Just happen to do know a few things because I have had to do them for my own site. I'm still trying to get proper rounded corners for tables :) Thanks for the link to the Pracitcal Typography site. They look like good suggestions, though I don't agree with all of them. As you said some are against the norm. cheers, mehul On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:39 AM, David Bjergaard <[2]dbjerga...@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Mehul, I'm still learning the magic of css. I was shooting for ~75 characters per line, and a readable (ie slightly large) font size. I'm curious, do you read the manual on a mobile device? I had never considered that a possibility at all since the manual is for a linux desktop environment. Again, since I'm so inexperienced with web design, I've just been following the suggestions that I can find with google. In fact, a lot of my education has come from: [3]http://practicaltypography.com/summary-of-key-rules.html And implementing the feasible/relevant suggestions. You will note that some of the suggestions there are definitely against the norm while others are pretty standard. I'll look into margin-left and margin-right and see if I can achieve something that looks good if the window is very narrow. Thanks for all the input guys, its really encouraging that people care that our documentation looks good... Now we/I need to make it read well too. Dave Mehul Sanghvi <[4]mehul.sang...@gmail.com> writes: > David, > > Great work on the new manual. I like this version. I was in the middle > of typing > up a response to the original email, when I got the email about the > update you've done. > > Using margin-right and margin-left in the body { } in style.css might > be a good idea > along with percentage values. This will allow it to be more readable > on a mobile device > as well. It could stay centred but slightly wider margins so more of > the real-estate is > taken up by the body rather than blank space. > > Other than that, I like this second version better. > > cheers, > > mehul > > On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:06 AM, David Bjergaard > <[5]dbjerga...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I've fixed some of the things outlined below, you've always got > the > option to "View > Page Style > No Page Style" in firefox. I'm not > sure > what the chrome invocation is. > > More feedback is definitely welcome! Its really nice to hear that > people > are benefiting from my work (even if I don't get it right the > first > time). > > Dave > > > > > David Bjergaard <[6]dbjerga...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Scott Jaderholm <[7]jaderh...@gmail.com> writes: > > > >> But I liked the garish look :( > >> > >> I thought I'd share a few of my reasons why just so you can be > aware. > >> I realize these are very subjective and people will disagree > about > >> them. I'm not trying to argue that I'm right and anyone else > should > >> agree with me. I'm totally fine with it looking the way you > like since > >> you've been putting in the work. I can always use my own > stylesheet. > >> These are just FYIs. > >> > >> - I like the way links look in the old version. It's obvious > what is a > >> link and what isn't a link without hovering over the text. Blue > and > >> purple texts are links. I also like how much clearer it is what > links > >> you've already visited--they're purple. In your version the > contrast > >> between visited and not-visited is very slight. > > I take your point, and will update the colors. (Though probably > not back > > to the default colors). > > > >> - I don't like the all caps. I find it harder to read. I find > it > >> particularly annoying on the table of contents where you want > to be > >> able to scan the sections quickly and identify which might > relate to > >> your issue. > > Again, I take your point, I was experimenting. > >> - I don't like how it's centered and narrow. I often read at > 300% zoom > >> (when far away from my screen, admittedly not the typical use > case) > >> and I like how the old one filled the window correctly at > varying zoom > >> levels. I realize that at 100% zoom with a wide window the old > version > >> would create very long lines. This didn't bother me, but I can > >> understand that it would bother other people. > > Unfortunately (unless many others complain) I won't change this > one. > >> - If there's a way to make Contents be in the same font as TOP > and > >> INDEX that would be nice :) > > The old manual is still up (though outdated and won't be > updated). Also, > > you can always read the manual from emacs with the info page > created. > > > > I don't want to sound pessimistic, I'm very glad for your > feedback. > > > > Dave > > _______________________________________________ > Stumpwm-devel mailing list > [8]Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org > [9]https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel -- Mehul N. Sanghvi email: [10]mehul.sang...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Stumpwm-devel mailing list [11]Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org [12]https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel Email had 2 attachments: * Screenshot-20140911-120402.png 200k (image/png) * Screenshot-20140911-120305.png 131k (image/png) References 1. http://practicaltypography.com/charter.html 2. mailto:dbjerga...@gmail.com 3. http://practicaltypography.com/summary-of-key-rules.html 4. mailto:mehul.sang...@gmail.com 5. mailto:dbjerga...@gmail.com 6. mailto:dbjerga...@gmail.com 7. mailto:jaderh...@gmail.com 8. mailto:Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org 9. https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel 10. mailto:mehul.sang...@gmail.com 11. mailto:Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org 12. https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
_______________________________________________ Stumpwm-devel mailing list Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
