6 ms·

please make it readable asap, cause it is not. - darken the text, low contrast destroys eyesight. - make the text bigger for god sake - use a serif font for

by camus2 13y ago

please make it readable asap, cause it is not. - darken the text, low contrast destroys eyesight. - make the text bigger for god sake - use a serif font for the main text,really,you can keep the headlines sans. - your website has a big whitespace/negative space balance problem. I mean,i dont understand designers today. Do they care about readability? or that a site look fancy on their shiny new mac ? As for performance problems i would suggest moving to a static site generator, a doc is the perfect use case.

fhd2 13y ago
A static site generator for a wiki?
- iand 13y ago
  A cache
- mintplant 13y ago
  That sounds like a good idea, actually. Why not? Generate and store each page each time it's edited, then serve from the static copies. There will be a lot more reads than there are writes anyway.
  - fhd2 13y ago
    That's a static page cache, not really the same thing. And I'm pretty sure they're doing this already, or are about to.
- groovecoder 13y ago
  We can't generate the whole thing statically, because there are parts of the interface that change with user state. We do render the HTML for article content, which includes many scripting templates. We're seeing a lot of interest in the static/caching side of the site. I wonder if we should do a public article about it and invite people to help us improve it.
  - chalst 13y ago
    Can you not serve a static page and then have Javascript fetch the additional, user state-dependent content? At the very least, that will reduce latency for some content. The public article will surely be interesting even if it is not all that useful...
subsection1h 13y ago
> use a serif font for the main text,really,you can keep the headlines sans. All the web usability studies and web design books I've read that address typography have stated that most people prefer sans-serif typefaces on screens. And the typefaces used by all the top sites reflect this.
- ggreer 13y ago
  I don't have a strong preference either way, but it's important to note that those recommendations came before retina displays. Serif fonts can't be rendered accurately on low-DPI displays. As more people get high-DPI displays, I bet serif fonts will be used more in body text.
  - jffry 13y ago
    This might be news to you, but not everybody has Retina (or equivalent) displays
    - ggreer 13y ago
      Umm... That's what I said. "As more people get high-DPI displays, I bet serif fonts will be used more in body text." I was making a prediction, not stating that designers should use one or the other.
yati 13y ago
If I had to suggest a change in the typography, I'd suggest the opposite. The headings(large text) can have serifs. But the bulk of the body should definitely be sans. Serifs add too much clutter when the font is small.
db48x 13y ago
Add this to your userContent.css: <http://db48x.net/MDN-fix.css> http://db48x.net/MDN-fix.css>. It fixes the whitespace problems, but I haven't touched fonts. Font size is best corrected by zooming in; Firefox will even remember your zoom level across the whole domain, so you only have to do that once.

by camus2 13y ago

fhd2 13y ago

A static site generator for a wiki?

iand 13y ago
A cache
mintplant 13y ago
That sounds like a good idea, actually. Why not? Generate and store each page each time it's edited, then serve from the static copies. There will be a lot more reads than there are writes anyway.
- fhd2 13y ago
  That's a static page cache, not really the same thing. And I'm pretty sure they're doing this already, or are about to.
groovecoder 13y ago
We can't generate the whole thing statically, because there are parts of the interface that change with user state. We do render the HTML for article content, which includes many scripting templates. We're seeing a lot of interest in the static/caching side of the site. I wonder if we should do a public article about it and invite people to help us improve it.
- chalst 13y ago
  Can you not serve a static page and then have Javascript fetch the additional, user state-dependent content? At the very least, that will reduce latency for some content. The public article will surely be interesting even if it is not all that useful...

subsection1h 13y ago

> use a serif font for the main text,really,you can keep the headlines sans. All the web usability studies and web design books I've read that address typography have stated that most people prefer sans-serif typefaces on screens. And the typefaces used by all the top sites reflect this.

ggreer 13y ago
I don't have a strong preference either way, but it's important to note that those recommendations came before retina displays. Serif fonts can't be rendered accurately on low-DPI displays. As more people get high-DPI displays, I bet serif fonts will be used more in body text.
- jffry 13y ago
  This might be news to you, but not everybody has Retina (or equivalent) displays
  - ggreer 13y ago
    Umm... That's what I said. "As more people get high-DPI displays, I bet serif fonts will be used more in body text." I was making a prediction, not stating that designers should use one or the other.

yati 13y ago

If I had to suggest a change in the typography, I'd suggest the opposite. The headings(large text) can have serifs. But the bulk of the body should definitely be sans. Serifs add too much clutter when the font is small.

db48x 13y ago

Add this to your userContent.css: <http://db48x.net/MDN-fix.css> http://db48x.net/MDN-fix.css>. It fixes the whitespace problems, but I haven't touched fonts. Font size is best corrected by zooming in; Firefox will even remember your zoom level across the whole domain, so you only have to do that once.