Am 14.10.2010 06:12 schrieb Michael Pedersen:
> Actually, for us, right now, I think the layout you did is an
> excellent start. So much so, that I'm going to ask if you could
> provide an hg repo I could clone, or other way to get your source
> files. My attempts are not coming out well at all.
Ok, I'll try to provide an hg repo over the weekend. But before that we
should solve the question of which parts should be fixed (see below), so
I can make the necessary adaptions.
> I might be willing to go with the "make a top nav bar that's
> sticky", but I would not agree to both. It gets too close to
> having a framed in middle area for content, and is very visually
> unappealing to me.
I actually have the same feeling, but maybe the problem is only that we
have been conditioned to abhor everything that looks like html frames.
Apart from that somewhat unsavory resemblance to a frames layout, are
there any real issues with fixed top and sidebars? Maybe printing could
be an issue, but with "@media print" should help here.
Also, the question is: What should be shown on the sidebar? The global
toc (as in my draft) or only the local toc of the current document?
If the global toc is shown, then we don't really need a separate top bar
with bread crumbs.
If only the local toc is shown, I think it should be accompanied by
properly working bread crumbs so you don't get lost in the doc tree.
But if a sidebar with a local toc is not fixed, then what's the
advantage over an ordinary toc such as used in the SQLAlchemy docs? It
has the same disadvantage that it scrolls out of sight, plus the
additional disadvantage that it reduces the usable width (well, as
already discussed, this can be an advantage because wide paragraphs are
more difficult to read so you need to reduce the width anyway). The
sidebar could be limited in height, but then you get an ugly lookin
uneven layout. But if it uses the place anyway, it could as well be
fixed. And in this case, I feel the top bar with bread crumbs should
also be fixed, because the sidebar with a local toc is kind of the last
bread crumb expanded, so they belong together.
The bar with the footer does not need to be fixed, though.
Unfortunately, the basic Sphinx layout makes it a bit difficult to join
it with the body, so it's in fact easier to make it fixed if the sidebar
is also fixed. But if we don't want it to be fixed, I guess we can solve
that by overwriting the basic template.
> I don't want to go higher than 1280x1024. Not for this. It's not
> needed, and not beneficial enough at this time.
Agree, though our audience is web developers. But even 1280x1024 could
be too much for reading on netbooks which often have only 1024x768 or
even 1024x600. The width is usually not the problem nowadays, but the
height often is. That's also a valid argument against a fixed footer and
maybe also a fixed header.
To summarize I think we should choose between the following options:
A) Fixed sidebar with global toc
B) Fixed sidebar with local toc + fixed top bar with breadcrumbs
C) Nothing fixed, local toc in sidebar (current layout)
D) Nothing fixed, local toc in page (as SQLAlchemy does)
Please give us feedback which you prefer (and why), or if you still
favor a different option.
-- Christoph
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TurboGears Trunk" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk?hl=en.
