|
As of October 27th, please open all new issues in the Red Hat Customer Portal . |
|
[
Permlink
| « Hide
]
Hiram Chirino added a comment - 05/May/09 03:48 PM
Font's updated.
Now most of the fonts, but not all, are in Serif. They should be in Sans Serif.
Will attach a mockup attaching serif version to more easily compare.
attaching serif version to more easily compare.
I personally like the serif versions more as it gives the forge a little more pop. Yes the sans version is consistent with the main site, but then again that's what makes it more boring.
In any case I don't think this is a 1.0 blocker
Going to send this around the horn to get input.. James what's your preference?
I don't have strong views on the font we use. However, I do think that it should be consistent on a page. At the moment in the serif examples, on both the pages the blue at the top and the orange text is san serif and the rest is serif.
Mary,
The point of the font difference in those elements is so that users can more easily identify menu/navigational/label elements of the page more easily versus page content. You guys really need to read and soak in this Web 2.0 Design Guide: Section #4 and and #8 Apply Also see http://www.webdesignerwall.com/tutorials/typographic-contrast-flow/ Hiram,
I think the latest version looks better than the last one. At least the ADG block looks like it belongs to the same page. The design just needs some tweaking around the edges to polish it up. Perhaps the layout could be changed to keep the serif headings and use sans-serif for the body text. The navigation links are clear because they use different colors and font weights, they don't really need to have a different font in addition. The text in the message divs are really chunky and blocky. Could they be shrunk down from a 14pt font to a 12pt font? That change may make the serif body text look more appealing. Cheers, |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||