|
|
Boost : |
From: Peter Turcan (peterturcan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-04-17 00:53:51
Vinnie, et al
Just a few comments on the new website, much appreciating the effort people
have put in to get this far. My comments are based on what is widely
considered best-practices to maximize readability.
1. Line length
Long lines are difficult to read and then pick up where the next line is.
The maximum length in characters should be 50 to 75, with 66 being a
popular choice. I would like to see a maximum set, and then the text wrap,
regardless of the screen width. Note that this does not apply to code -
which should be compilable and as is.
2. Italics in headings
This is widely considered a bad idea - italics is typically more difficult
to read than regular text. It works for the first time a name is mentioned,
but not to be honest much else. Even quotes are better in regular text.
Consider using a popular heading font (Helvetica, Arial, etc) - perhaps in
bold or semi-bold, and again perhaps colored such as dark blue.
3. The tables are over-designed. The double lines are too busy and pull the
eye towards the lines and away from the text. I like vertical lines between
the columns to be a single line and light (very light) to separate the
contents but not distract the eye. For row lines perhaps consider
zebra-striping - no lines as such but a light background to every second
line. If you don't like zebra striping, consider no horizontal lines at
all, just add a point or two of space between table rows to enable easy
distinction of the cells. The table heading row should be bold text, as it
is now, and be the first line of zebra stripes if they are used.
Tables should also adhere to the maximum line length rule (per single
column). No column should contain a line that exceeds the specified line
length (say 66 chars).
4. All code pages should end with a See Also section, so that the
async_read function can point to the async_write function, and vice versa.
And to other closely related or alternative functions - async_byte_read if
there is such a thing.
5. The coloring in the code sections, in the synopsis or in tables, does
not seem to match the standard - green for comments for example. I would
consider setting the colors to the standard used by Microsoft Studio etc.
6. The links within text lines don't stand out enough for me. They should
be link-blue in color, but perhaps try a bold or semi-bold.
7. I much prefer a sans-serif font to a serifed font - so much easier to
read. I don't think serif fonts belong on computer screens. I also prefer
the font size to be a bit larger than currently on these pages. The font
sizes used by email clients are often well chosen for readability.
I think if readability is made the focus, a great website will be the
result.
- Peter
CppAlliance Technical Writer
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 1:07 PM Andrey Semashev via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 4/16/24 21:40, Vinnie Falco wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 8:41 AM Andrey Semashev via Boost
> > <boost_at_[hidden] <mailto:boost_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
> >
> > I also like the current boost.org <http://boost.org> font more.
> >
> > Here are some screenshots of the new site using the default sans-serif
> > font, we would be happy to hear your thoughts on it.
> >
> > https://github.com/boostorg/website-v2/pull/1064
> > <https://github.com/boostorg/website-v2/pull/1064>
>
> Yes, this font looks much better.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk