trinity-devel@lists.pearsoncomputing.net

Message: previous - next
Month: October 2014

Re: [trinity-devel] Re: [trinity-users] New TDE site released

From: "Timothy Pearson" <kb9vqf@...>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 18:35:29 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA224

> On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:32:53 -0400
> "E. Liddell" <ejlddll@...> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 19 Oct 2014 21:10:41 -0500
>> "Timothy Pearson" <kb9vqf@...> wrote:
>>
>> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> > Hash: SHA224
>> >
>> > >
>> > >> > Hi,
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Visually, I have no problem with either using the provided false
>> > >> shadow or the CSS3 one. What it does
>> > >> >when it is displayed in Konq-error? Does it make Konq go crazy or
>> it is
>> > >> just not shown.
>> > >>
>> > >> Konqueror just ignores the style instruction, because it's limited
>> to
>> > >> CSS2.
>> > >> So the screenshot appears with no shadow (and a little bit of extra
>> > >> whitespace
>> > >> below it).  In other words, it's harmless and downgrades
>> gracefully.
>> > >>
>> > >> E. Liddell
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > Well, it's okay for me to have the CSS3 shadow if it is harmless for
>> > > Konqueror. These little adjustments improves a lot the website and I
>> think
>> > > that these changes are ready to go to production. What do you think?
>> > >
>> > > Thank you!
>> > > -Alexandre
>> > >
>> >
>> > OK, let's go with the CSS3 shadow and get opinions from others on the
>> list
>> > regarding this design.  If the consensus is that the new site is
>> better
>> > then we'll put it into production.
>>
>> There may be a problem with the stylesheet on screens where the main
>> text area is shorter than the sidebar.  I'm trying to figure out a fix.
>
> Never mind, found a fix, although I'm not entirely happy with it.
> The revised site style is now on webdev, for those who have access.
> Tim, due to the rearrangement of the page's geometry, your "donate!"
> link has shifted out of place.  I'll fix that later.
>
> E. Liddell

Looks good overall, however I prefer the non-italicised header links.  Was
there any previous discussion on that UI element?  If not, what is the
rationale behind italicizing those links?  I personally have a hard time
determining they are links instead of noninteractive headers when they are
italicized.

Thanks!

Tim
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iFYEARELAAYFAlRFnEAACgkQLaxZSoRZrGEaUgDgm2i0kofwyhZjJasE7rHeqvZY
saaJTsRWqexRRQDfc0jHg9LmEXiimczpjzxnUa7nHv1MlPDL8cPoLg==
=bSmN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----