Re: design update

Dave Malcolm <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gnome.office.general
Message-ID <1076428021.24116.1814.camel@shirehorse1>
On Tue, 2004-02-10 at 15:24, Charles Goodwin wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-02-10 at 14:55, Jody Goldberg wrote:
> > Could both of you post links to your proposals and some quick point
> > form notes of why you think it rocks.  I'll bounce them off some web
> > people as judges and post the result.
> 
> My design: http://www.charlietech.com/goffice
> 
> It rocks because:
> 
>  o  It's standards compliant (although this goes without saying)
>     and cross-browser compatable looking good in all of them

Actually it's not :-)

I tried clicking on the W3C XHTML1.1 validator link and it complains
about a few things...  Though they'll be easy to fix if the design is
adopted.

(Sorry to be pedantic.  I like the design BTW)


> 
>  o  It scales beautifully between low (640x480) and high (1280x1024
>     and probably higher) resolutions (note the way the screenshots
>     move accordingly!)
> 
>  o  It's really clean with an emphasis making important parts
>     catch the eye, getting the information quickly to the mind
>     of the viewer
> 
>  o  It's graphically independent - just icons and a header which 
>     are simple to change and are so small that the effect on load
>     time is barely noticable if at all
> 
>  o  It's very professional looking; we are aiming at a professional
>     market in general (and geeks appreciate nice designs anyway)
> 
>  o  It's a tidy design, where the content is well separated from
>     the layout so it's easy to update (the front page being a minor
>     exception although nothing complicated) - the CSS does the work
> 
>  o  When you look at it you think positive thoughts...
>     warm thoughts...  clear thoughts... you breathe deeply...
>     relax... (Oh ok then I'll stop there!)
> 
> I'm sure I could think of more but I'd be really scraping the barrel and
> the bottom line is that it's what _you_ think that matters and not my
> incredibly biased opinion.  (Although I do my best to remain objective
> on the list!)
> 
> I personally think it rocks, that it is constructed with a bit more
> usability acumen than Ryan's design and hence more suited for our target
> demographic.  But, again, that is my (arguably unqualifed) opinion and
> not the one that counts.
> 
> Vote for Charlie for low taxes and extra welfare!
> 
> > Sound reasonable ?
> 
> It must do since I just replied. ;)
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.