in reply to Re: revise font?
in thread revise font?

But providing sensible defaults for certain uses isn't that bad a plan is it?

I think a big part of the problem with better default style is Anonymous Monk and the need to allow him to access the site in a minimalistic format. As long as user settings are one to one with users we have this problem. If we could make the relationship 1:N then wed be better placed to make the default look a little nicer.

---
$world=~s/war/peace/g

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: revise font?
by ysth (Canon) on Jul 01, 2005 at 07:34 UTC
    That would involve moving stuff like numwriteups, lastviewednewestnodes, and the wiki and inbox read flags into proper database fields where they belong :) Is locking stuffed in there too? Sounds like a lot of work for not all that much gain.
[reply]

      Well, perhaps we need to seperate site style settings from the stuff like that. In fact the more I think about it the more it seems like a good idea. Have a second settings hash that isnt updated every time but only read. Only user settings type nodes would need to update it. This would also improve our ability to cache as the stuff with a low change frequency would be seperated out from the stuff that changed per visit. There is also the $THEME object, which is pretty minimally used and im not sure where it fits into this picture.

      ---
      $world=~s/war/peace/g

[reply]
Re^3: revise font?
by DrHyde (Prior) on Jul 01, 2005 at 08:37 UTC
    The defaults *are* sensible, at least for all the browsers on all the platforms that I use. It is likely that by making it more easily readable by you it would be made less easily readable to me. Therefore the correct solution really is for people to apply their own stylesheets if they feel the need.
[reply]

      Therefore the correct solution really is for people to apply their own stylesheets if they feel the need.

      A solution unavailable to Anonymous Monk but available to you as a logged in user. Personally i think making life a little nicer for Anonny outweighs the few registered users that would have to change things.

      But do realize we do try not to break established customs or expectations or whatever, so its unlikely youll notice things if we do decide to change them. (Unless of course our intent is to make you notice, like the new CSS attributes for readmore tags.)

      ---
      $world=~s/war/peace/g

[reply]
        It's not really available to me because I don't know shit about stylesheets :-)

        It *is* available to Anonymonks who know about such things because - so people who care about such things inform me - they can ask their browser to apply a style sheet from their local machine.

[reply]
      DrHyde wrote "all the browsers on all the platforms that I use..." (emphasis supplied)

      So that's a somewhat narrowly limited testcase, isn't it?

      DrHyde also wrote "making it more easily readable by you it would be made less easily readable to me"

      No, actually using style sheets would not necessarily do that. It might, but if so, that result would most likely be the result of a deficient design or testing process re the css applied here.

      ...and, noting your denial (below) of knowledge re css, it should be a quite simple matter to provide the default style-sheet used here as a template for a local config that would satisfy your preferences with much less trouble to you than you would face config'ing SAMBA, Apache or (pick another).

[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion