On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 3:21 AM, Dennis Schridde<[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Zarel, > hi list!
Ello. > http://developer.wz2100.net/ starts with bug reports. For a general > development introductory page this might not be the best choice. I would put > it more towards "Programming", and maybe even dedicate an own page to it. > - Reason: The introductory page should direct to the right documentation. The > chunk of text at the beginning draws more attention than necessary. > Apart from that: Agreed. I agree that it's not perfect, but I'm at a loss for further improvement, and I feel like I'd lose information from it if I rewrote it entirely. Feel free to make whatever changes you see fit (it is a wiki, after all). > PS: Is it possible to improve the CSS of http://developer.wz2100.net/? I like > the one of http://wz2100.net/ a lot more, if we are going to use the site not > exclusively for technical documentation. The one of wz2100.net is missing a lot of the CSS that developer.wz2100.net has. I had to argue with Giel for a while to get monospaced fonts the right size, and right now superscripts still do not render correctly (compare http://wz2100.net/download with http://developer.wz2100.net/wiki/Download ). It also doesn't render indentation properly (compare http://wz2100.net/ with http://developer.wz2100.net/wiki/Website/Frontpage ). Overall, it's missing a lot of CSS that's probably used in the wiki. While I agree that what it does implement, it implements better, but we should probably duplicate all the features of the current CSS file first. On the subject of CSS, the forum CSS sometimes makes links invisible until a user mouses over them (limited testing seems to show this occurs only on unvisited links to URLs within the wz2100.net domain) - this should be fixed. > I would prefer to have such stuff in the Wiki. > - Reason: Ease of editing. Infeasible, because it uses a ton of charts that are formatted in ways that can't be done on the wiki (the pages are stored in raw HTML). Plus, many of those charts are generated on-the-fly, and it would take lots of work to change the wiki on-the-fly. Plus, the URLs wouldn't look nearly as nice. Plus, wikis in general impose limitations that simply don't work in a guide. > If that's infeasible, at least make sure it's on the same server (make > wz2100.net a mirror using rsync, for example) and stays in line with the > current layout/style. (Use the same (links, not copies) CSS files.) Ever since it's been moved to guide.wz2100.net, it's been on the same server. I would allow any user to edit the Guide pages, however Kamaze isn't letting me access the user database, so I can't identify users to allow them access. Currently I just give access to nearly any user who asks for it. Using the current layout/style is a bit more complicated. I can duplicate the _current_ style, and use its stylesheet in addition to my own, but I can't guarantee that it would be updated when the main site's layout is updated (that would be up to Kamaze). > In addition http://guide.wz2100.net/ is not an introductory page like > http://wz2100.net/user-guide is. > http://guide.wz2100.net/intro comes closes, though it is not the frontpage. Well, I'm not sure an intro page would make a good home page. A contents index with quick links to major sections makes the most sense to me. More suggestions along these lines would be nice. > It also has style issues: > - Starts with a *huge* flash box, which makes the page look almost empty on > first sight for me. Well, the video _is_ a good introduction. And it's only 640x480. I guess I could use the 320x240 one again. > - The "Introduction" section should be merged into the http://wz2100.net/ > frontpage if necessary. In this location it seems like duplication. Agreed. > - "Installing" mentions compilation instructions. I'd prefer a link to the > Wiki instead. It _does_ link to the wiki. It just also provides basic compilation instructions. I believe this part was lifted from the Docs Project - in fact, the entire introduction is a rewrite of the introduction in the Docs Project. > - The Documents Project finds no mention at all. The Documents Project is nearly completely written about the 1.10 version. I've moved nearly all the information relevant to 2.2 into the Guide itself. > - There is no hint to the Development section. "Hint"? If you mean link, there's a link to the development section on the home page. > - Contact information (better: a link to them) is lacking. Can be added. > - The navigation panel on the right is not immediately noticed as such. ...? What navigation panel on the right? There's a navigation panel on the left, but I'm not entirely sure how you want it to be more noticeable. > In general I would prefer a more textual page with less markup. (Markup is > like makeup: Best effects are achieved if applied decent.) Text is hard to read - users tend to skip over it entirely. The "list of links" on the home page isn't much better, but I'm hoping to eventually add some graphics to make the links more recognizable at a glance. > Means: In-text links, headings should not detract from the content, not too > much colour which could draw attention from the important parts, etc. > And get that flash thing away from the start of the page. In-text links are used where appropriate. As far as I know, headings currently don't detract at all, and the color seems fine. Do you have specific objections? Of course, style/color objections are moot if I'm going to be switching to wz2100.net's layout/style, anyway. The video is a very good introduction to what the game is about! (Or at least the campaign plot.) So, currently, it seems we disagree on how best to format the home page of the guide. That's understandable - I've never liked the "big list of links" format - although I'm not the only one to use it (cough http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/Play http://classic.battle.net/scc/GS/ ). Seems no one has a better way. Do you have a good idea about what it should look like? Maybe put up a page on the wiki with your layout idea? -Zarel _______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
