Re: [boost] Re: [website] More "improvements"..

From: Jason Earl (Jason_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-05 05:16:46

from my experience, people with larger monitors buy them for a reason, 
generally that reason being they want to open more windows without as 
much clutter. Rarely do they open pages a their max monitor resolution, 
and let me say nothing makes more more mad when popups use javascript 
to resize themselves to 3200 x 1200, my desktop resolution.

Generally about 12 words per a line is right for normal text. The best 
way round this is to use em's where possible to dictate the layout by 
default. The option to go liquid or fixed with would be a user option. 
This way people can resize the text without break ups. A lot of people 
who use high res screens seem to run using a very high dpi, and 
therefore tend to shunt the font size up, which can break layouts the 
work to an absolute pixel based/fixed layout.

Another thing to bear in mind, a good web design for a site like the 
boost site should be designed so that the printed version of the page 
uses paper efficiently. If I make a print style sheet, I normally 
disable all navigation elements, and keep headers / design as simple / 
minimal as possible. Too many sites produce bad print outs where there 
is a huge waste due to a left margin caused by a nav bar, and then the 
body of the text being cut off on the right because it doesn't fit the 
page width. This is typical of pixel based layout that are fixed to a 
set width. The print issue is more important with something like Boost 
than your average company site, because things like API documentation 
is often printed for later reference. many find it easier to read 
paper, not to mention not many people have big dual screen layouts to 
place the IDE on one window and the documentation etc on the other 
screen.

If the site was made with CSS, you wouldn't need to concern yourself 
should the site be fixed / elastic / liquid as the user can choose. By 
default liquid or elastic design is best. I agree with the idea of let 
the user resize the screen, as many people will do that to their taste.

 From what i can see, is the whole documentation in docbook format? in 
that case, it would be nice to see a CHM version for Windows users, as 
the indexed search system is very handy, and is ideal for people who 
have laptops and might not be online all of the time. Single HTML / PDF 
docs are too bulky for many. If everything is in docbook format as 
well, it should be easy enough to use a single layout to redo all the 
docs should the website's design change a little as everyone is 
probably aware.

Jason

On 5 Ebr 2005, at 09:17, Paul A Bristow wrote:

>
>
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> | [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Rene Rivera
> | Sent: 05 April 2005 05:36
> | To: boost_at_[hidden]
> | Subject: Re: [boost] Re: [website] More "improvements"..
>
> | I only assume that 10 to 12 words per line is
> | the most pleasing line length.
> | That is what centuries of research and experimentation have shown.
>
> But that is only for plain text, and nearly all of Boost is broken up 
> with
> lines of code and other aids to the eye that the short line length 
> provides,
> so I don't think it is safe to extrapolate this our use.
>
> (I also note that 'ragged right' has been shown better for reading,
> but when did you last read any printed stuff like that?
> Graphic and web designers are obsessed with overall apperance!)
>
> So I strongly support Jeff Garland on this -
>
> "Let the user adjust the width of the browser".
>
> Paul
>
> Paul A Bristow
> Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB
> [phone]  [phone]
> mailto: pbristow_at_[hidden]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: 
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
>