Problems with the new design

discourse

#41

Pastel colours are good.

As hannes said, the scrollbar has almost disappeared, but apart from that it’s a lot more readable.

I don’t think you’ll ever get it optimal for both desktop and mobile: mobile sites often have higher contrast because people are using them in daylight.

Surely the code supports different presentation for each platform? Most websites do that these days.


#42

I’m OK with the khaki (I was OK with the original, FWIW), but then the font colour needs to be darker, it’s kind of hard to make out, and, as mentioned, the scrollbar is all but invisible.
BUT…

Really, sir?
I’m in documentation, and we pretty much ditched the serif fonts in like 1998.
I find this font way way more tiring to read.

Oh, and I just found out the Edit and other buttons at the bottom of own posts can’t be seen unless you mouse over them.


#43

I like how the site feels more like the old forums now, but everything has become harder to read since the rest of the elements were only designed with a white background in mind. Needs more contrast.

And I’m against a serif font for text. Serif is reserved for titles while sans is used for everything else. I thought this was common knowledge.

Here’s an example of a site with a similar color scheme: https://english.stackexchange.com/


#44

Ditto.

@tempogain @GooseEgg Maybe we can try this color scheme, but with the old font?


#45

This font’s all kinds of wrong.


#46

At the risk of creating a logical paradox, the best advice I can give about the visual design of a website is not to ask every user’s opinion about it. You’ll ask 100 people and get 100 contradicting opinions and end up with a mess. Someone needs to dictate it with an iron fist.


#47

Very true, but that someone should know lots about UI design :slight_smile:

I agree with the font suggestions: it’s really just a matter of style, but IMO sans would look better on modern displays. Serif fonts were generally more legible on old, low-res displays, especially at small point sizes, but they look a bit dated now.


#48

I hear what you are saying, but what @tempogain and I are doing is soliciting feedback and trying things out. And these changes are not difficult to make, thank goodness.

When we talked about the Solarized color scheme, we looked at that site and realized it was easy to try it out. I suggested we give this format a week and see how we feel about it then - we have only been on Discourse for less than 3 weeks. I plan to read all of your thoughts, and I also plan to reach out to people I know personally and get their opinions and suggestions, too. Then I will bring what I got to @tempogain and make some decisions about what to change, change back, or keep.

I really appreciate people voicing their views here. Please also feel free to shoot me a message (I like how Discourse makes it easy to invite people into a Private Message conversation, and also offer the option of making a PM into a public topic)


#49

Actually, what I thought was common knowledge was the reverse! But I have come across (yet) another argument that proposes that Serif fonts are for print and Sans-serif fonts are (now) for websites.


Serif vs Sans Serif on Forumosa
#50

Definitely need black or darker text on this background.


#51

[quote=“Rocket, post:42, topic:154628, full:true”]
Really, sir?
I’m in documentation, and we pretty much ditched the serif fonts in like 1998.
I find this font way way more tiring to read.[/quote]
I am posting this just because I had heard that serif fonts were supposedly easier to read

If you like, we can talk about it more here:


#52

Trying a darker text color here. The system seems to automatically change the color of certain elements automatically based on text color, for example. So I’m seeing a lot of light blue highlights that weren’t there before.


#53

Serif fonts are easier to read. Some sans serif fonts create problems because it is difficult to distinguish between 1Il.


#54

JFYI, I posted a poll about the typefaces here. Unless you feel strongly about it now, I hope you will vote on it after visiting Forumosa for a few days


#55

OK this is looking better right now. Defcon can ease down one category.


#56

May I suggest a color scheme creation tool?

I took the current beige (#FDF6E3) and generated a set of colors that look nice together. Perhaps we can figure out a set of colors that mashes well this way.


#57

We only made changes to the basic color set in Discourse.

So some of the shades and blue buttons that you see are somehow derived from these changes that we made.

Sure, we could probably override certain elements. But I do not know when @tempogain or I would take the time out to figure that out (btw, if you would like to figure that stuff out and let us know, that’s totally cool).


#58

One thing to be aware of here, when using the stock system tools, some of the colors are chosen automatically by the system, like the light blue currently being seen. The system apparently chose this based on the text color used, by some non-transparent method. So getting things exactly how we want it may take a bit of trial and error.


#59

Coming up with a comfortable and original color scheme could be time-consuming, which is why I suggested the Solarized palette. Solarized is well-grounded in science, based on a lot of experience, and has already proven itself in many applications. It also bears some resemblance to the old phpBB theme, which gives the new Forumosa a little continuity and a personality of its own. Ultimately it’s going to be a matter of opinion but I think that the color change is a huge improvement over the default black-on-white.

People complaining about the font are sort of missing the point because “the font” you now see on Forumosa is the one you yourself selected in your browser, and the same one you’ll see on many other websites, for example on Wikipedia. Good web design is about respecting those settings and Wikipedia’s layout, which also follows this principle, withstood the test of time quite well.

For many people who have never touched this setting, the default font might be something like Times New Roman, which is admittedly ugly, but the good news is you can change it anytime. Personally I use Caecilia, which comes with Amazon Kindle. Other very legible serif fonts that can be downloaded for free include Charis SIL, Sanchez Regular, and Amasis. Even if you don’t want to install any new fonts, you most likely already have Microsoft’s [Georgia] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_(typeface)) or Cambria, which you can try. On a decent screen with font anti-aliasing (“ClearType”) switched on, the right kind of serif font should look more legible for most people.

Still, if you really despise serif fonts, just choose a sans-serif one (try Segoe UI or Calibri) but the point is, with the things the way they are now, the font you see on Forumosa is your own preferred font from the browser’s settings, so if you don’t like it, just go there and change it once and for all. I certainly appreciate the ability to do just that. Thank you @tempogain, @GooseEgg for all the hard work!

Incidentally, phpBB also respected the user’s preference and did not impose Arial upon everyone, although it defaulted to the sans-serif font.


Serif vs Sans Serif on Forumosa
#60

Anything that enhances readability gets my vote. I see that the gray colored fonts have reverted to black - thank goodness, the gray really strained my eyes! I also find sans serif to be more readable than serif. Guess that fonts aren’t an issue with Chinese text: 你好 looks the same either way.