[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Debian Pure Blends Webpages

"Iain R. Learmonth" <irl@debian.org> writes:
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 01:37:41PM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote:
>> The font within the tables is smaller than the regular font. IMO this
>> makes it a harder to read, and also doesn't look very aesthetically
>> (just my opinion). I would try to restrict the number of fonts (and
>> sizes) to a minimum.
> The tables use the same CSS class as the tables at
> https://www.debian.org/ports/. I used it for consistency across the pages.
> If the tables should be different, this change should be applied across the
> whole website. I am happy to implement anything where there is consensus on
> the debian-www mailing list, but the discussion would have to happen
> there.

I asked on debian-www; let's hope that there is some response. However:
In my opinion, the ports pages are also hard to read because of this
small font of a large part of its content.

We will see what the discussion gives here.

>> All entries in the "Description" Column have the format "The goal of
>> $BLEND is". This looks like an unneeded redundancy: you could just
>> rename the column from "Description" to "Goal" and remove the first
>> few words.
> For these descriptions, these should be useful to users as well as
> developers. I'm not happy with them as they currently are. Note that these
> have already been translated and any changes will create work for the
> translators as they will need new translations. I would like it if there is
> consistency across them, but unless I can find time, I would need someone
> else to propose the changes to make. I'm not even sure the descriptions I've
> put are even accurate, as they were gathered from a number of sources. I
> don't know if we do a blends census but that might also be a good idea to
> see what is happening with each blend.

Can't we ask the blends authors for a short description for the blend
(like the short descriptions we do for packages)?

> If we have changes that are good and will be good for an extended time, then
> I'm happy to apply them.

That's why we should discuss it here, right?

>> A third suggestion: Many blends have their own logo. For the overview,
>> it may be nice to have the logo there as well.
> I would not want to display logos for every blend

Why not? Logos are usually intuitive, and people remember them quite well.

Best regards


Reply to: