Good to hear from you!
Eric S Fraga <e.fr...@ucl.ac.uk> writes:
I do like the animated images in the features page!
Glad you like them! I recently converted the static images to SVGs
with the help of someone using Emacs27 w/ Cairo, would be nice go
do something like an animated SVG in the future, but that's for
(much) later :P
I do wonder about
the order of the topics within that page, e.g. working with
source code, although powerful, is probably not the lead item
for new users. However, that's a minor point at this stage.
Thanks for this feedback. I prioritised the source code blocks
because:
a) my impression is that to Comp/Data Sci people, they are one of
/the/ most
compelling features of Org-mode
b) they're similar to elements people are familiar with (Jupyter
notebooks, R markdown), so the Comp/Data Sci segment of our
audience is already roughy familiar with part of their
capabilities
I shifted the agenda/capture/clocking/etc. features down because
a) they semantically seem like they should go together b) having
them near the top pushes down too many other features too much,
IMO
Absolutely worth considering the order, please share any further
thoughts you may have :)
More generally, can the column width for the text be a function
of the window width and have images scaled so that they are not
wider than the text column? It should be possible to have
mobile friendly without making the columns too narrow for full
desktop use. The fact that the images are much wider than the
text makes the page look ugly, in my opinion.
The column width already is. I just find long lines undesirable.
50-80 characters is the standard in publishing for a reason.
To quote from /The Elements of Typographic Style/,
Anything from 45 to 75 characters is widely regarded as a
satisfactory line length of line for a single-column page set in
a serifed text face in a text size. The 66-character line
(counting both letters and spaces) is widely regarded as ideal.
For multiple-column work, a better average is 40 to 50
characters. If the type is well set and printed, lines of 85 or
90 characters will pose no problem in discontinuous texts, such
as bibliographies, or, with generous leading, in footnotes. But
even with generous leading, a line that averages more than 75 or
So characters is likely to be too long for continuous reading.
There's more to be said about line spacing and the reasons for
this - if I recall correctly /A practical guide to typography/
(available online) goes over this.
I look forward to hearing any further comments you may have!
Timothy.
