On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 07:25 -0400, John Ferlan wrote: > On 03/30/2016 10:19 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > > Basically, the navigation menu is *way* too big, and takes > > the focus away from the actual content. Plus it's very easy > > for longish words to overflow it (see "Authentication" in > > the screenshots below). > > > > The headers are probably bigger than needed as well, so > > I've scaled them down. Using Wikipedia for comparison, > > you can see the new size is more comparable to what they > > use. > > > > Some other minor cleanups have been included as well. > > > > Before[1] and after[2] screenshots for your convenience. > > > > Cheers. > > > > > > [1] http://i.imgur.com/MZchAWD.png > > [2] http://i.imgur.com/BXepLTh.png > > > > Andrea Bolognani (7): > > docs: Adjust vertical whitespace in CSS > > docs: Remove empty CSS rule > > docs: Don't use <strong> in headers > > docs: Make menu entries smaller > > docs: Don't use bold text for menu entries > > docs: Use bold text for all headers > > docs: Make most headers a bit smaller > > > > docs/apps.html.in | 2 +- > > docs/generic.css | 15 +++++++++------ > > docs/libvirt.css | 30 ++++++------------------------ > > 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > > Lot's of style churn here lately... Ironically the view I get from > libvirt.org has always had slightly bolder and larger text as opposed > the view I get when viewing changes in a local branch. That... Shouldn't happen. I wonder if you increased the font size while viewing libvirt.org at some point, and your browser is remembering that as a per-website preference? > Personally, I > like the larger, bolder text since it's easier to read than some font > style that's meant for a mobile phone. The idea behind Cole's initial changes, if I'm not mistaken, was to make the website more readable by using sites such as Wikipedia as reference. So better spacing etc. Big font sizes are good, but the text shouldn't be comically large. > As long as we don't start adding > graphics and flash, we're good ;-)! Don't even think about it! > Anyway just a note that patch 3 removes the h1 font-weight bold, but > patch 6 claims all headers except h1 were already bold... Not a big deal > due to the end result, but I assume they should be together. All headers except for <h1> were already bold: what patch 3 does is removing the only instance in which bold text was used as part of a (non bold) <h1> header, and the CSS rules needed for that specific case. Patch 6 then goes ahead and makes <h1> bold like all other headers. > My only other comment would be regarding <dt> elements - I would prefer > to see them use a slightly bolder text so that they stand out from the > rest of the text. If I read the tea leaves correctly that would be an > adjustment to the <dt> to have "font-weight: bold;". I didn't notice that, but I'll look into changing it next. > Other than that you have an ACK from me... and it should be safe for > freeze... I've pushed the series. Thanks! -- Andrea Bolognani Software Engineer - Virtualization Team -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
