Re: design

On May 9, 2004, at 17:49, alex wrote:
> NOTE: i sent this to olivier already, but i wasn't paying attention 
> and didn't realize i didn't send it to the whole list.

Thanks for resending it. I'll just copy my answers here as well.

> I can't see the point of the images, other than to make the page load 
> longer on my modem. is there a purpose for the images?

The main purpose, really, is to make the validator interface 
friendlier, less dry. But the fact that the images are a bit too big 
(not to mention that some-very-popular-browser fails to cache them) is 
a know issue that we'll have to address. There is, for example, no 
strong reason to have two images, and big ones.

> i agree, but i think that the revalidation form is a vital part to the 
> page which should be styled as thus.  i tried to cut it's height as 
> much as possible, but i could probably do more.

Vital - yes, but once you've read the options one, one should be able 
to use revalidation without bothering with them, or having to read them 
again and again. Smaller type would be a simple idea.

> in this redesign, i left the html as-is

Ah great, I was wondering about that.

> , but if i were to change it, i would change the help message.
>   i think it's too redundant to have it everywhere on the page.  i 
> think it would be better to have it once on the page and anchor a help 
> wanted link where it would be.

Yes, that's precisely one idea we had, though it was not implemented 
for this release. I expect we'll do that for the next release, due soon 
(as we're actually trying to release more often from now on).

I think you redesign is really going in a good direction, and so did 
other people who have seen it too. It would be wonderful if you could 
work with us on finding a good balance between the attempt at user 
friendliness (e.g images in the banner) of the current validator and 
your sleek re-design.

Thanks a lot.
-- 
olivier