CentOS docs - Nov 2007 - Wiki deuglification, last (at the moment) part

Hey,

one last change maybe - with the 3% padding on top and bottom, we really
lose screen estate at the top. 

How does it look to you without any padding at top/bottom (leaving a
10px white line there)? That's what's live on wiki-m.centos.org at the
moment.

Or, if all of you want to have some more space above there (and the
background pattern) go with 1% padding?

1% padding means that there will be *1* line of checkered boxes over the
white space over the header ...

[insert personal opinion: 1% padding looks better, IMHO, but other
people seem to like the 0% padding instead.]


Other than that, I'd like to call this the "Final Version" for
now, with
which I'd like to go live on the real wiki before 5.1/4.6 hit the
mirrors.

That doesn't mean that we won't improve the design any further, but
I'd
like to show some progress to the outside (release early, release often)
...

Cheers,

Ralph
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-docs/attachments/20071121/8b5f1522/attachment-0001.sig>

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
> Hey,
>
> one last change maybe - with the 3% padding on top and bottom, we really
> lose screen estate at the top.
>
> How does it look to you without any padding at top/bottom (leaving a
> 10px white line there)? That's what's live on wiki-m.centos.org at
the
> moment.
Looks fine - I would do the same at the sides as well.

Lance

-- 
uklinux.net -
The ISP of choice for the discerning Linux user.

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Ralph Angenendt wrote:
> one last change maybe - with the 3% padding on top and bottom, we really
> lose screen estate at the top.
>
> How does it look to you without any padding at top/bottom (leaving a
> 10px white line there)? That's what's live on wiki-m.centos.org at
the
> moment.
>
> Or, if all of you want to have some more space above there (and the
> background pattern) go with 1% padding?
>
> 1% padding means that there will be *1* line of checkered boxes over the
> white space over the header ...
>
> [insert personal opinion: 1% padding looks better, IMHO, but other
> people seem to like the 0% padding instead.]
>
>
> Other than that, I'd like to call this the "Final Version"
for now, with
> which I'd like to go live on the real wiki before 5.1/4.6 hit the
> mirrors.
>
> That doesn't mean that we won't improve the design any further, but
I'd
> like to show some progress to the outside (release early, release often)
> ...
I would bring it live right now and do the optimisations later. There is
no need to get clearance of those things if most people already condoned
most of the meat :)

-- 
--   dag wieers,  dag at centos.org,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]

On Nov 21, 2007 6:31 PM, Ralph Angenendt <ra+centos at br-online.de>
wrote:
>
> one last change maybe - with the 3% padding on top and bottom, we really
> lose screen estate at the top.
>
> How does it look to you without any padding at top/bottom (leaving a
> 10px white line there)? That's what's live on wiki-m.centos.org at
the
> moment.
>
> Or, if all of you want to have some more space above there (and the
> background pattern) go with 1% padding?
>
> 1% padding means that there will be *1* line of checkered boxes over the
> white space over the header ...
>
> [insert personal opinion: 1% padding looks better, IMHO, but other
> people seem to like the 0% padding instead.]
>
>
> Other than that, I'd like to call this the "Final Version"
for now, with
> which I'd like to go live on the real wiki before 5.1/4.6 hit the
> mirrors.
You have a go for me. Let's get this online. It is already a great
improvement over the current one. And it would be great to get this
going before the 5.1 release.
> That doesn't mean that we won't improve the design any further, but
I'd
> like to show some progress to the outside (release early, release often)
> ...
Indeed, finetuning can be done over the coming days and weeks.

Regards,
Tim

-- 
Tim Verhoeven - tim.verhoeven.be at gmail.com - 0479 / 88 11 83

Hoping the problem  magically goes away  by ignoring it is the
"microsoft approach to programming" and should never be allowed.
(Linus Torvalds)

On Nov 21, 2007 9:31 AM, Ralph Angenendt <ra+centos at br-online.de>
wrote:
> Hey
Let's go live now.

Akemi