Nikolay Nikolov via fpc-pascal said on Thu, 17 Oct 2024 11:20:15 +0300
>> I also agree. Unfortunately, as I said, compiler developers don't >> make good web designers. >> >> Examples for bad sites (I'm repeating myself, I know): >> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ >> >> https://llvm.org/ >> >> But this time I'll also give some better examples: >> >> https://nim-lang.org/ >> >> https://www.haskell.org/ >> >> https://www.rust-lang.org/ >> >> https://ziglang.org/ >> >> https://www.python.org/ > >Another example - Ada, a Pascal-like language: > >https://ada-lang.io/ > >Nikolay This is interesting. You've described two sets of sites, one relatively bad and relatively good: Bad = (freepascal.org, gcc.gnu.org, llvm.org) Good = (nim-lang.org, haskell.org, rust-lang.org, ziglang.org, python.org, ada-lang.io); So I compared the two sets and the most noticeable thing that stood out was that the good sites had substantial sections having a dark background. A second, less noticeable and less consistent difference between the sets is that the good websites have subsections within the sections that are separated by substantial whitespace and on wide monitors are side by side. The bad ones seem to be massive walls of text. Please think about it. If you had to give somebody a specification for a "good web page" and avoid the dreaded "you know what I mean" that our clients always give us when asked, would these two factors comprise most of the difference between good and bad websites? If so, it's pretty easy to make a good website, always assuming somebody with aesthetic taste decides on those background colors and the foreground colors that go with them (and please make them contrast for the visually impaired). If I'm right about the definition of good sites, all it takes is HTML5 and some CSS skills. Even the top menus can be made with CSS sans Javascript. I also noticed that a lot of the good websites were good on the home page but reverted to the bad style on other pages. The Python site always had the "good" layout. Nikolay, your post is the first time I ever heard anyone specify a specification for a good site. Everyone else seems to ether say "you know what I mean" or "you don't have the skills, hire a designer". So what do you all think? Does a good site really boil down to generous sections of light content on dark background plus generous spacing between sections and subsections? Thanks, SteveT Steve Litt http://444domains.com _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org https://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
