Marketing Message for Calligra

[Adam C.]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:04:28 +0100, Jaroslaw Staniek <staniek at kde.org>  
wrote:

> On 22 December 2011 12:51, Adam C. <nospam at xibo.at> wrote:
>> to me the design looks a little bit like hastily cobbled together. the
>> elements are not aligned, there is no contrast and the different font  
>> types
>> are fighting each other.
>
> Thanks for the notes.
> Please help to improve the alignment by pointing what exactly can be
> aligned better.
>
> If you see 2 or 3 pixels misalignment please read the entire email -
> this is a mockup that even uses uselicensed graphics, btw.
i've read the mail, thanks for the hint, but it's not just a few pixels.
here i tried to display, what i mean:
http://wstaw.org/m/2011/12/22/not_aligned.png

note that it's not only misalignment, but also the lack of contrast.

>
> There's one font used bitstream vera sans.
> The content is a copy from the current web site which seems to use
> bitstream vera serif but hey - this is a mockup - we do not discuss
> about the body part now.

ah, ok. without body i only count 5 fonts. imo a different font colour,  
style, size and boldness is also a different font (to some extend). well,  
ok. it's rather like 'big differneces are ok, but small not'.
http://wstaw.org/m/2011/12/22/fonts.png

>
>> there are to many elements, especially for
>> navigation (the apps, the top right menu, device selector and the  
>> monitor).
>
> Inge can confirm I knew that the 9-apps graphics would be found as the
> weakest element because it was created for the current calligra.org
> layout. Imagine a wide rectangular banner there to get the idea what's
> this area about. One banner per one area (desktop/tablet/etc.)

this is also kind of what i had in mind.

>
> There are 3 navigation levels, as in the well established web
> standards for this type of a web site (which I repeat: is not a blog).
> Compare e.g. at http://adaptivepath.com/ideas/e000103

i'm not against 3 navigation levels, but for me the mockup looks a little  
bit messy (no offence). the article is quite old btw (2003) and i guess,  
there are other articles, which say, that less navigation is better. i  
just skimed through the text, but it seems to say, that you should rather  
do less navigation with a maximum of 3 levels. but i may have  
misunderstood the text.

>
>> of course also i am not a designer, but we had some lessons in  
>> university on
>> this topic, so i tried to quickly stick something together.
>> http://wstaw.org/m/2011/12/22/calligrahp__.png
>
> nice too, but I also see misalignment here and these 3 levels of  
> navigation...

can you point?

>
>> this is far from perfect, it could use some more contrast, the fonts  
>> should
>> be consistent, and the bottom news area is lifeless (could use some  
>> graphics
>> there).
>>
>> this message is intended to be constructive, please don't feel offended  
>> or
>> something.
>
> Good, that's why we are working on that together this early!
>


-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/