Aaagh! Re: [Clipart] new site design in progress

[Alan Horkan]

[only got a post offlist but it seems like it was intended for the list,
replying onlist)

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004, Chad Smith wrote:

> >
> That's true,  I can't use my scroll mouse either (but it is a Mac, so
> the scrolling is kind of a hack, so it might work on Windows computers).
>  The Page Up/Page Down thing is a loss, I agree.
>
>
> >The three column layout looks
> >cluttered on smaller screens and is actually a step back, the site
> >originally had a three column design.
> >
>
> I like the columns.  It looks good.
>
> >The Search tool is no longer clearly labelled as "Search".
> >"Get Clipart Packages" is not as obvious as "Downloads" or "Download
> >Clipart"
> >
> >
> I might agree with the "search" part, but I totally disagree with
> "Downloads" being clearer than "Get Clipart"...  I think the average
> person can better understand "getting" something than "downloading".
>  Besides, downloading sounds like what you are getting is a program or
> something, but "Get Clipart" is about as clear as it gets.

I believe that users scan pages for the words "Download" and
"Screenshots", as almost standard parts of the website interface.

Even if there are clearer English sentences, context makes all the
difference.

> >None of the links are underline anymore.
> >
> A lot of sites don't underline links.  It's not needed.  As long as the
> word stands out (different color, bold, brackets, something), and they

It may not be necessary but I happen to like blue underlined links, and
Jakob Neilsen recommends it.

> change when I mouse over them (like it underlines - as on OCAL - or it
> changes color, or the cursor changes, something), then it is fine.  I
> think underlining everything is ugly.  The look for the site works very
> well in that regard.

Unfortunately you need to mouse over some text and see it changes before
you know if it is a link.  It is better to consistantly use blue
underlined text for links so that it is immediately obvious what the links
are and there is no guessing required.

> >The blues are okay but the greenish-grey colour is not very pleasant.
> >
>
> I think that color came from the Creative Commons.  It identifies us
> with them, and it matches.  I like it, kind of an olive drab meets tan.
>  It's classy and casual at the same time, like khakhi!

It is still a horrible colour.  We already identify our connection to them
with a button at the bottom of the page.

We happen to use the Creative Commons Licensing.  We are no more
affiliated with them than a project using the GPL is affiliated with the
Free Software Foundation.  I've nothing against making official ties with
the Creative Commons but the colour does not go well with the
rest of the colour scheme, at least on their site it fits in
with the other shades of green they use.

> >How compatible with old crappy browsers like IE5 is the new site?
> >
> >
> Mac OS 9.2, Internet Explorer 5.1 - the front page works perfect for me.
>  Some of the links are broken, though.  The Submit Artwork page looks
> awful.  The submit screenshot link redirects me to whatever page I'm on,
> and some of the other links do nothing at all.
>
>
> >
> >I'm sorry I cannot provide more constructive criticism but I really think
> >the changes have significantly disimproved the site.
> >
>
> I think you are wrong about this.  It isn't perfect, but I think the
> overall change is *much* better than the old site.  The old site was
> pretty much copied from Inkscape, and they've changed their site since
> then.  I think the "look and feel" of the new design is awesome.  Much
> more inviting and cool.

I still think old site was a lot clearer and more functional, hopefully
the stylesheets can be cleaned up a bit so and we can have it both ways.


Sincerely

Alan Horkan

http://advogato.org/person/AlanHorkan/
Inkscape, Draw Freely http://inkscape.org
Free SVG Clip Art http://OpenClipArt.org