On 2012-12-05 11:39 (GMT-0500) Ryan composed:
Felix Miata wrote:
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/
1-JS required. Why? Documentation is boring text, more necessary than
wanted. A static Table of Contents is offered as substitute for JS
behavior, but has no clickable links to any actual documentation.
Obviously JS can enhance, but to serve up no useful information
without it?
2-Boldly states "welcome", yet creates unwelcome feeling via
preponderance of
mousetype[1], as demonstrated by:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=657934
It makes me unhappy and want hit the back button, not welcome, and not
wanting to face the dig for the instruction I need. I'm hardly alone
on this
issue.[2]
http://boot.fedoraproject.org/faq
Personality altered from docs via use of gray text of similar size to
further
reduce legibility.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=657935
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAQ
The difference here is the even less legible list of tiny pale blue links
overwhelming the viewport, even smaller text in the main subject area
than
the navigation wrap.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=657936
Is there a compelling reason Fedora can't be a leader in web site
friendliness as well as distro compilation? Am I the only one involved
in the project who thinks following the lead of most of the rest of
the web is rude[3]?
[1] http://hermeticpress.blogspot.com/2009/04/mouse-type.html
[2] http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html
[3] http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/rudeweb.html
So to sum it up, the default font sizes of some of the fedora websites
is too small, and some are too lightly coloured?
That's an easy conclusion to draw, and accurate, but it misses the point,
which is the philosophy of the styling rather than particular styling details.
Would it also be possible to get the bugs that those attached
screenshots are from?
All the same place (filed 2 years ago):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638726
The newer Bugzilla software used by Mozilla.org includes the bug number as an
element of the URL of the attachment once the attachment is actually opened.
If the current version of the Bugzilla software used by Redhat wasn't
misconfigured to prevent opening image attachments in the browser used to
open the bug, the attachment URL could be appended with &action=edit,
resulting in seeing the applicable bug number.
Additionally, those screenshots are quite busy,
It's busy purposely, to provide context necessary to evaluate the reason for
the problem as much as the problem itself. People often use the term "too
big" or "too small" without providing any way to sense why such language was
used. The view is of a whole desktop, including familiar reference objects,
with the specimen to be evaluated at its center.
and i find it very hard to parse the information on them. Is what you
are running there basically a tool that assesses the font sizes of
websites?
It's only a tool in the sense that I use a template to load a specimen URL
into a frame in order to provide sizing context. The URLs in the images can
be loaded in any evaluator's browser to compare in a personal desktop context.
Finally, the best way to help out with making the fedora websites
better is to help out the websites team! The follwoing link gives you
all the details on how to join and help out!
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites
I explained why in comment 13 in the bug hosting the screenshots that that
hasn't and likely won't happen in the sense I get from your suggestion.
--
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
--
websites mailing list
websites@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/websites
