Skip to content

Website overhaul #204

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
3 tasks done
sophie-h opened this issue Jun 2, 2021 · 16 comments · Fixed by #205
Closed
3 tasks done

Website overhaul #204

sophie-h opened this issue Jun 2, 2021 · 16 comments · Fixed by #205

Comments

@sophie-h
Copy link
Contributor

sophie-h commented Jun 2, 2021

I adjusted the design based on gtk-rs/release#138

So far, it seem that everyone would like the design better than the status quo.

There have been some discussion about grey and white. Here are two versions, which both have a darker background than the current gtk-rs.org.

I'm not really happy with the header design. But it would also depend a bit on the final project icon.

  • Decide on grey
  • Adjust to/add icon
  • Replace project list with something having less optical illusions

1-light


1-dark

cc @sdroege @GuillaumeGomez

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

I obviously prefer the greyer version. But otherwise this is a very welcome improvement, thanks!

Do you have an ETA for the logo btw?

@sdroege
Copy link
Member

sdroege commented Jun 2, 2021

I prefer the brighter version for contrast reasons between the text and background. It seems to be some broken new trend to make everything in washed out colors and little contrast.

A bigger problem that I just noticed is that the "Projects using Gtk-rs" has that optical illusion with dots appearing between the the tiles. A bit like https://www.instructables.com/Optical-Illusion-Mysterious-Black-Dots/

Apart from that: Gtk-rs, gtk-rs, GTK-rs, ...? All lowercase looks nicer to me 🤷‍♂️

@bilelmoussaoui
Copy link
Member

Apart from that: Gtk-rs, gtk-rs, GTK-rs, ...? All lowercase looks nicer to me man_shrugging

Yes, thanks for bringing this up. There's nothing called Gtk, it's either GTK or gtk. It feels just wrong to have the bindings called Gtk-rs.

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

I prefer the brighter version for contrast reasons between the text and background. It seems to be some broken new trend to make everything in washed out colors and little contrast.

You have to follow trends old man. :p

A bigger problem that I just noticed is that the "Projects using Gtk-rs" has that optical illusion with dots appearing between the the tiles. A bit like https://www.instructables.com/Optical-Illusion-Mysterious-Black-Dots/

And now I see them too... Thanks I guess? 😝

Apart from that: Gtk-rs, gtk-rs, GTK-rs, ...? All lowercase looks nicer to me man_shrugging

I think we never settled that. I don't like GTK-rs but otherwise I don't mind.

@sophie-h
Copy link
Contributor Author

sophie-h commented Jun 2, 2021

Apart from that: Gtk-rs, gtk-rs, GTK-rs, ...? All lowercase looks nicer to me

I would prefer GTK-rs because it look more like a project name to me and not only a crate/repo name. But I'm fine with both.

download (10)


download (11)

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

What about putting some shiny effects on the name instead to make it easier to be seen? :)

@sophie-h
Copy link
Contributor Author

sophie-h commented Jun 2, 2021

I think since the light grey variant is (theoretically) even darker than the current website I would commit the lighter variant. @GuillaumeGomez could change it afterwards and it's no longer my responsibility 😆

@sdroege
Copy link
Member

sdroege commented Jun 2, 2021

GTK-rs or gtk-rs I'd say, and I would prefer the first.

For the grey issue, I actually preferred the very first version (which was also grey and not white :P). Maybe we should ask an actual designer about this stuff, or @bilelmoussaoui contrast application ;)

@sophie-h
Copy link
Contributor Author

sophie-h commented Jun 2, 2021

or @bilelmoussaoui contrast application ;)

If I didn't messed up the contrasts are okay according to the app. (Otherwise I would have already used that as an argument :p)

@sophie-h
Copy link
Contributor Author

sophie-h commented Jun 2, 2021

Some ideas floating around

  1. Remove "Useful links" (maybe merge remaining useful links into FAQ?)
  2. Remove "Tutorial" since it is outdated and replaced by the book
  3. Remove example code from start page since it is not tested and duplication with rustdoc and book
  4. Advertise book on start page
  5. Only list most prominent crates on start page
  6. Remove "Documentation" since we have links on the start page
  7. Move information about lowest required library version to the corresponding rustdoc pages.

download (15)

@sophie-h
Copy link
Contributor Author

sophie-h commented Jun 3, 2021

A bigger problem that I just noticed is that the "Projects using Gtk-rs" has that optical illusion with dots appearing between the the tiles

This change fixes it for me. It's also what I had in mind originally, highlight that this is some 'random collection'. Does that work for you?

download (16)

@sdroege
Copy link
Member

sdroege commented Jun 4, 2021

Seems good to me, thanks :)

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

Looks pretty nice now!

@sophie-h
Copy link
Contributor Author

sophie-h commented Jun 6, 2021

What I would like to have to finish the website

  1. Decision about the project name
  2. Ine sentence on what donations are used for

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

For the 1., we need to vote between GTK-rs and gtk-rs, let's do that tomorrow.

For the 2., this is something we need to discuss once the release is over. I have a few ideas but I want to submit them to the contributors first. This is a tricky question and I only have some leads on how to answer that.

@sophie-h
Copy link
Contributor Author

sophie-h commented Jun 6, 2021

this is something we need to discuss

Okay, didn't knew that. Removed it from the list.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants