Re: CSS for Help Docs

[Alexander Kirillov <kirillov math sunysb edu>]

Looks better indeed. 
To clarify about the logo: if I understand correclty, foot icon in your
example is just part of background image. This, of course, makes it
impossible to replace it with doc-specfific icon. We need to discuss how
exactly we should put doc-specific icon in its place, how XSL and CSS
stylesheets hould work together. I'll try to catch you on IRC tomorrow.
As for headers and footers - no, I do not have any suggestions. But
maybe someone else has? 
 (Please, not extremes like this
http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/libgnome/libgnome.html ). 



As for rendering of notes, tips, etc: I personally prefer softer and
lighter colors; the ones you use now make it the most noticeable thing
in the page, the first thing taht catches your eye  - which, IMHO, is
not quite what we want. But this is just my opinion as a user, not that
I have any experience in web design or have done any user testing. I
really think we should get usability project people involved in this -
after all, there are some real pros in user interface design there.
Maybe you could just send an email to usability list asking for their
comments?


Sasha

On Sun, 2002-02-03 at 01:36, Nicholas Curran wrote:
> Hey.
> 
> Thanks for the comments.  An altered version is now at
> http://members.austarmetro.com.au/~quasar .
> 
> The Style Guide does not demonstrate tips, cautions, notes and
> warnings.  Therefore, I have also included the template, edited to show:
>  * The affect of the CSS.
>  * A caution and a tip.  (Yeah, the toolbar cat nonsense *is* silly.)
> 
> Further notes below.
> 
> On Sun, 2002-02-03 at 07:06, Alexander Kirillov wrote:
> > 
> > Dear Nicholas:
> > thanks for doing this! We definitely need a CSS. Here are some comments:
> > 
> > 0. I liked the blue striped background. 
> 
> :)
> 
> > 1. we need to agree on whether the logo is added by  XSL stylesheets or
> > by the CSS. We can't have both (as it is in your example). Doing it via
> > XSL stylesheets allows using different logos for different apps (as
> > suggested on this list earlier); doing it via CSS, as part of background
> > image, looks nicer. Ideas?
> 
> The logo is yours to take care of.  I just included the foot as a
> demonstration of where I believe the icon should go.  I should have
> mentioned this in my last post.
> 
> > 2. Please tone done the yellow color used for examples. Right now, it is
> > way too aggressive. Also: wouldn't it be better to just put a solid
> > background (a  light one) under the whole example rahter than to use 
> > gradient?  
> 
> Didn't seem that bad to me.  Or that good for that matter.  I had
> difficulties doing the solid background for the programlisting, due to
> the text not wrapping and going beyond the box, and without thinking
> believed this extended to examples.  Any better now?
> 
> > By the way, I liked very much the way examples are shown in Dave
> > Raggett's HTML guides (see http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Guide/Style.html) -
> > he uses different foreground color for them. Maybe we should do the same
> > with <programlisting> and <screen> tags? 
> 
> I like this idea.  It has been implemented.
> 
> > 3. Something is wrong with the way lists are shown (see sections 1.3,
> > 1.4). Do we really want that much space between number (1.)  or bullet
> > and the text?
> 
> Badly designed CSS, my problem.  I was specifying most of the major 
> HTML elements, and indenting them, which caused this problem.  Now I
> just indent the body, and make the browser knock the headers into the
> margin.
> 
> > 4. I's rather *not* have the horizontal rule after section titles and
> > things  such as "Copyright", "Authors", etc. in the titlepage. 
> 
> Drake (Eric) noticed yesterday, when I was asking for opinions in IRC,
> that I had completely forgot about the title page.  So I just added the
> CSS to it, and the result was ugly.
> 
> Now I use a second CSS for the title page, which removes the 'horizontal
> rules' from <h2> tags.
> 
> > 5. One place that  might use some  colors is the navigation headers (top
> > and bottom). But I do not know what would be the best thing to do with
> > them... 
> 
> Mmmm.  I'm pretty happy with the appearance of the headers.  I don't
> think the result would be that pretty, and the strips at the top will
> probably end up being partly covered up if we specify a colour for the
> top header.
> 
> Did you have any colour in mind?  There is no harm in trying one, or a
> few.
> 
> > 6. We might show this to usability people - e.g.  Seth Nickell
> > <snickell stanford edu>, who (AFAIK) is responsible for default theme
> > for GNOME 2. They have to look nicely togetehr. 
> 
> The accessibility people may also have an interest in this.  A CSS can
> have aural attributes, which means that it can state how a HTML doc can
> be read out to the user.  Perfect for the blind, if we have that
> technology in GNOME (I haven't looked at GNOME's accessibility
> features.).
> 
> Enjoy.  I am still interested in more comments, good and bad.
> 
> Nick Curran
> <quasar austar net au>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-doc-list mailing list
> gnome-doc-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-doc-list