86 lines
6.7 KiB
Markdown
86 lines
6.7 KiB
Markdown
I think it would be a good idea to think about the standard layout style of ikiwiki, the current layout used in a standard setup and on ikiwiki.info as well looks a bit old-fashioned to me. I guess that a nice modern layout would attract more new ikiwiki users and boost the ikwiki community...
|
|
|
|
> FWIW, I agree. The actiontabs [[theme|themes]] would be a better default, but something which showed what ikiwiki was capable of (or more precicely: that ikiwiki is as capable as other popular wiki softwares) would be better still. — [[Jon]]
|
|
|
|
>> As an author of plugins that interact with the UI, I think it's good that
|
|
>> a *minimal* ikiwiki has a minimal anti-theme, and that plugins are
|
|
>> developed against the anti-theme - it's a "blank slate" for themes.
|
|
>> [[plugins/contrib/trail]] was much easier to get working in
|
|
>> the default anti-theme than in actiontabs and blueview.
|
|
>>
|
|
>> Technical detail: all the standard themes are done by appending to the
|
|
>> anti-theme's CSS (albeit in ikiwiki's build system rather than during
|
|
>> the wiki build), rather than by replacing it - so themes that haven't
|
|
>> been updated for a new UI element end up using the version of it from
|
|
>> the anti-theme. [[plugins/Comments]] and [[plugins/contrib/trail]]
|
|
>> both need some tweaks per-theme to make them integrate nicely,
|
|
>> but most of the design comes from the anti-theme.
|
|
>>
|
|
>> That doesn't necessarily mean the anti-theme should be the one used
|
|
>> on ikiwiki.info, or used by default in new wikis - from my
|
|
>> point of view, it'd be fine for either of those to be actiontabs
|
|
>> or something The important thing is to *have* a "blank slate" anti-theme
|
|
>> that looks simple but sufficient, as a basis for new styles (either
|
|
>> [[themes]], or wikis that want their own unique stylesheet), and derive
|
|
>> the other themes from it. --[[smcv]]
|
|
|
|
> Ikiwiki's minimal theme is not modern. It's postmodern. I like it for the
|
|
> reasons described here. <http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/web_minimalism/>
|
|
> " The minimalism sucked you in, it made the web feel like one coherent,
|
|
> unified thing, unlike the constellation of corporate edifices occupying
|
|
> much of it today."
|
|
>
|
|
> I see an increasing trend back toward these principles, driven partly
|
|
> by limits of eg, smartphone UI. So I certianly won't be changing the
|
|
> look of any of my ikiwiki sites, including this one.
|
|
>
|
|
> `auto.setup` and `auto-blog.setup` could have different defaults,
|
|
> or allow a theme to be picked as [Branchable](http://branchable.com/)
|
|
> does. Perhaps actiontabs for auto-blog and default for wikis? --[[Joey]]
|
|
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
Is it still Joey's opinion that ikiwiki.info should remain using the anti-theme?
|
|
|
|
I'd like to make one last, clear petition to move ikiwiki.info to using the actiontabs
|
|
theme. Rationale below.
|
|
|
|
I wanted to just ask one last time if that was still the case. I've been considering
|
|
picking back up my ikiwiki hacking efforts, as well as thinking about my personal use
|
|
of ikiwiki, and I was privately pondering on the health of the project. IMHO, it's not
|
|
great unfortunately, and we could use more contributors. I feel that the anti-theme on
|
|
ikiwiki.info is putting off potential users and thus potential contributors. The
|
|
actiontabs theme would be a better "advert" for ikiwiki: a better demonstration of what
|
|
you *could* do with it, and I think that's an important function of the site. I think
|
|
people might come across ikiwiki.info whilst looking for basic information on the project
|
|
and be put off by the anti-theme.
|
|
|
|
Honestly, I also find it hard to read information on the site due to the anti-theme (yes,
|
|
the default font face and size etc. are my own brower's preferences, but I sometimes use
|
|
browsers on other machines that I have not configured), including the wide (lack of)
|
|
content margins, and prefer to interact with it (generally) using local clones.
|
|
(I've just made *this* edit this way, but actually because the login process via email
|
|
seems to be broken for edit/preview workflow. I might investigate/file about that later.)
|
|
|
|
I wonder if someone feels the same, since you defaulted to actiontabs on branchable.
|
|
|
|
Thanks, [[users/Jon]]. (2017-12-28)
|
|
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
9 month ping, does [[Joey]] or [[smcv]] have any kind of opinion on this matter,
|
|
subsequent to my last comment? I ask because both of your takes on the issue are from
|
|
way back in 2011. — [[Jon]] (2018-09-24)
|
|
|
|
----
|
|
|
|
saw this "typesetter CSS" and was reminded of the anti-theme (and my 18 month old appeal to revisit that decision):
|
|
[typesetter-css](https://screwtapello.gitlab.io/typesetter-css/example/demo.html):
|
|
|
|
> HTML is a semantic markup language, but web-browsers' default presentation of semantic HTML is more based on compatibility with decades-old browsers than with readability. There are browser-addons that will take a page, strip out the presentational markup and try to present the result in a readable format, but that shouldn't be necessary if you've got sensible semantic markup to begin with.
|
|
>
|
|
> Typesetter.css is a custom stylesheet designed to present generic, semantic HTML in the most readable way possible.
|
|
|
|
The readability problems with unstyled HTML that this project talks about are exactly why I think the anti-theme
|
|
as default for the main site should be revisited. — [[Jon]] (2019-08-16)
|