[theforum] w.e.o. updating/rethemeing
ekm at seastorm.com
ekm at seastorm.com
Wed Oct 8 13:50:16 CDT 2008
yanno, there's a lot of subjectivity in how a site "looks." "good" vs
"not good" - what does that mean?
I hate "2.0 blue" as seen on default myspace and twitter pages... but i
can *live* with 2.0 blue. As long as the site works. ALA? It works.
And, IMO ALA is beautiful and professional. It's a magazine-site and it
does its job... (my main criticism of ALA is that some of the links aren't
totally obvious until you hover..). I like Martin's classic blue links
and clean clarity. I'd be fine w/ any site w/ clear links and
user-friendly navigation, even if it incorporates my not-favorite color
"2.0 blue" into the design (mind that color will date a site as fast as a
horizontal striped bg did in the early 2k days, or "bright on black" did
in the late 90s... ok I still like horizontal striping and bright on
black... but hate 2.0 blue... anyhoo it's a MINOR thing)
my POINT BEING: "looking good" is largely subjective stuff.
Can you navigate the site? Does it work as advertised??? That's the meat
of it.
In the current design: not so much. Submitting an article is not for the
faint-hearted. Style-guide is out of date, site is fraught w/ dead links
and ominous error messages... frustrating.
The awesome thing is, there ARE people here with time and energy to make
things happen. I hope that we can find a way take this and run with it.
Erika
> 2008/10/8 Erika <ekm at seastorm.com>:
> I do like Martin's theme, and much more than our other options today.
> That said, if whatever we come up with doesn't look at least as good
> as ALA (and it's good, but not *that* good), I don't think it's going to
> do the trick we're hoping for.
>
>
> jh
>
More information about the theforum
mailing list