> Regarding ideas for improving the site, I'm not afraid of change. If > this whole discussion ends with "everything is fine now, let's do > nothing", than I'll be disappointed. I'm sure our site isn't optimal, > and even if it was optimal one year ago when Harald rolled it out, > there is no harm in refreshing it and giving it a new look. > > Instead of comparing the site to Mathematica's (which I personally > also do not like, as it also makes me feel very nervous, > uncomfortable, and frustrated), maybe people could point out what > software project web sites they really love. For example, I really > like the SQLAlchemy homepage: http://www.sqlalchemy.org It's really > clean, easy to find links to important things quickly, looks good, > etc. > I would have to agree that
http://www.sqlalchemy.org/ is quite nice. Perhaps substituing "SQLAlchemy powers such websites as: ..." with "Sage is used in the fields of" and then things like "Pure maths", "Engineering", with links to some examples. I'll have a hunt around and see if I can find some other software projects web sites which I find attrative I asked on uk.net.web.authoring for someone to compare the sage and Mathematica sites. Here's one persons view. I think it is pretty useful. What he covers, which I'd not thought about, is now they look when printed out. ---------- Comments from doraymeridt...@optusnet.com.au --------- The wolfram site has 12 errors but 2 warnings in validation matters, whereas the sage site has 14 errors. Perhaps we can can call it neck and neck at this stage of the race. The one uses transitional 4.01 and the other XHTML 1.0 Transitional, in neither case is it clear what they are transitioning from. The w site looks nicer, classier in colour and print. All clean and sort of neat. The s one is too lurid with the purplyblue. The w site author uses a flash box which is sort of annoying unannounced. The w top menu text wraps unnecessarily at larger user text sizes and the drop down menus then get confusing. The search box starts to disappear into the red. On other pages, the top menu items can actually disappear at bigger user text sizes. Other blemishes due to poor fixed pixel dimensioning where text breaks out. Irritating horizontal scroll bars when strictly unnecessary. A source (see View Source) that looks rather incompetent in too many ways to list. It's a bloody wonder the show gets on the road. The s site is simpler to look at, and (with javascript off at least) more pleasant to negotiate and read... Both authors would benefit from being simpler, dropping every fancy bit of javascript and flash, and reading: <http://htmldog.com/> but using Strict 4.01 doctype. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
