More Comments on Python Redesign
tim.parkin at pollenationinternet.com
Mon Sep 8 16:07:15 CEST 2003
I'm replying off list as, to be honest, I've had enough.
Thanks for your message though. I've made a few changes to the pages and
you can see them at
Pollenation Internet Ltd
m : 07980 59 47 68
t : 01132 25 25 00
From: python-list-admin at python.org [mailto:python-list-admin at python.org]
On Behalf Of Richie Hindle
Sent: 08 September 2003 14:54
To: python-list at python.org
Subject: Re: More Comments on Python Redesign
> [...] I was merely reacting to some unfounded criticisms of the
> design I'd put forward. If I seem to have been a little over the top
> then I apologise profusely but as you can imagine the reaction to 8
> weeks of hard work that had been put in by quite a few people.
> Comments like the one you have made just make me realise how much
> time we've all wasted.
> Thanks for your work on this. I for one *do* like your design
> And I'm unpleasantly surprised by the tone of the criticism as well.
Hear, hear. Regardless of whether one thinks the new design is an
improvement (or even a worthwhile project to undertake), it should be
clear that an awful lot of work has gone into it. People should take
into account when choosing how to express their opinions.
For the record, I believe the Python website looks dated and could use
some improvement. I have a few small problems with the proposed
but I do think that given the simple question "which is better", the new
one (with its typography issues resolved) is better. Here are some
(hopefully constructive and dispassionate 8-) comments:
o There is no "What is Python". A homepage should explain what the
company/organisation/product/project *is*, either there on the
or one unambiguous link away.
o *All* of the non-navigation content is dedicated to case studies,
and announcements" and "Features and articles". This will need to be
constantly updated, or you'll find that the same content sits there
forever. Be careful - don't commit yourself to updating a
dynamic-looking site for ever more, when you could publish a more
static-looking site that still fulfills all the requirements. (I
from experience here.)
o It could be a fluke, but it looks like the page has been designed to
fit onto an 800x600 screen. These days, people know about
(That is not a flippant remark - only a small number of years ago it
wasn't true.) Content should not be sacrificed for the sake of
avoiding scrollbars (but the most important information should go
the top). Flexibility should not be sacrificed for visual appeal.
o The design as it stands makes it difficult to change. What if
decides that there should be a link to the FAQ on the homepage -
would you put it? The design is *so* tight and well-balanced that
making edits will degrade its appearance. Not sure how to address
one (but IMHO it's a consequence of not having enough space dedicated
to static content, and striving for a perfect 4x3 800x600 rectangle).
o I like the logo, and I like the visual look and feel. Well done!
I agree with others that the two-tone Py/thon is at best unnecessary
and at worst confusing.
richie at entrian.com
More information about the Python-list