I like UK Indymedia the way it looks. Please avoid white or other glaring, light coloured backgrounds and please keep the text-body fonts nice and big!

People will only read articles online--especially long ones--if they don't get eye-strain trying to read tiny fonts like the ones on the new site.

It is currently fashionable to use small fonts. This ia just silly.

The first question opticians ask nowadays is whether you regularly use a computer. And for good reason: they are a positive health risk to eyesight. Indymedia should keep up the excellent example it has and not become an eyesore!

Spot on, Bill.

The only change I'd make is to swap the black b/g for a blue, to make it even less of a strain.

The original poster should know that Google looks like it does because the blue on white is easier for quick scanning of links, and is not designed for extended reading.

Bri.

Sod the corporate Jacob Nielsen type analysis - it looks fine to me. Sometimes I think some of the usability types conclusions can lead to dull web design. It's simple to use, anyway.

The site does look dated, very similar to your veiws Brian.

If you want more new people to use and access the site it has to be usable and to do this you need to apply some rules in keeping with the web and if you break these rules you need to know why your doing it! Saying 'but i like it how it is' is as short sighted as it is stupid.

there is many things wrong with this site but many things right! I think everybody can agree tring to post an article or even a reply is a nightmare.

And such 'rules' have not come about from corporations they have come about from extensive research over a number of fields by many universities (ever heard of MIT? Chomsky?).

Just goes to show the filth are still on here. Oh and by the way pigs that are reading this YOUR FUCKING SHITES NOT WORTHY OF COMMENT!

This si what Mike had to say from Urban75 an there a discussion going on there, follow the link!



That colour scheme might prove tricky for those with colour blindness issues, the text isn't resizeable, that 22k header image is going to slow things down for peeps accessing on slow connections/mobiles and there's an awful lot of empty space in the middle.

There's also an overall lack of focus on the page - I found my eye lurching all over the place - and the 'branding' isn't very strong at all (it used to be easy to recognise an Indymedia site by its 'look')

The top nav bar is too easy to miss and that main graphic hogs too much of the page to no good purpose. And there's no ALT text (I know it's only a test page, but you asked for feedback!!)

I'd also have some concerns about the overall weight of the page which is likely to rise above the current (rather hefty) 70k when full y populated with content.

But I think you're right to change the layout and move away from the black, but I'd suggest a bit more focus on usability and aesthetics.


Me thinks he and Jacob Nielsen know a bit more than u bunch of coppers/facists

Regards

Where do you get the idea that I'm a 'pig' or a 'facist' (is that someone who discriminates against people whose faces he doesn't like?)?

I'm just a normal Indymedia reader, who happens to work in the area of Internet applications and web programming.

I looked for any reference to Chomsky pontificating about web design rules, and failed to find any. The nearest I got was a Guardian interview where he admitted to using the Web.

Jakob Nielsen, on the other hand, is forever spouting about web design and usability. His site is *awful*! I really struggle to read the extremely thin font he uses on it, and hate the bright white background. That yellow he uses sucks as well.

Reading black or blue text on a white background is painful after a while - especially with the sort of intensity provided by today's monitors. Ever wonder why green screens were around for so long? Because they were easy to read, and didn't promote eyestrain so much, numbnuts!

I agree that the site could be made easier to use for the visually impaired, but to propose poncing it up for the sake of impressing the likes of Nielsen is just silly.

Posting could be quicker, but then again the site is served using PHP, with an open source DB at the back end, so it's not doing too badly overall.

Just because I don't agree with you is no reason to call me a pig or a fascist - if you do it again, I shall just assume you're one of those SWP wankers and ignore you.

Bri.

Firstly, i was refering to Chomsky teaching at MIT (to highlight MIT) where a lot of research has gone on.

Secondly, I whole heartedly agree Jacob's site is a pile of wank, but there are a lot of other influential people who have given guidelines design.

Third, Jsp's are a lot more powerful and there other optons than MySQL to use that are more robust and user friendly. Indymedia should not need to create there own technologies for a website, theres plenty out there that many peope know how to use. Creating specialised software will result in loads of bugs and restricting the amount of peolpe that can use it

Finally reading black (or dark grey) on white? come on don't be silly! (books throught the millenia?) and how often do you need to read vast quantities of text anytime on the net? you don't But if there is why not give the option of a pdf file?

Also it would be nice when writing a reply to be able to see the previous coments at the same time.

JSPs may (or may not) be more powerful, but Indymedias throughout the world (so far as I know) all use the same basic PHP / MySQL or Postgres setup - the different looks are just a matter of taste by the individual media centres.

Personally, I'm more inclined to use servlets than JSPs (they're quicker to execute, and it's easier to write straight Java code and then handroll the HTML output than it is to fiddle with tags etc.), but there are plenty of good sites out there running PHP, without being noticeably slow.

The database at the back end probably is an issue, but Slashdot runs quite happily on a MySQL back end, and that site takes far more hammer than any Indymedia centre. Besides, industrial strength database servers cost industrial strength money, which Indymedia centres don't have.

Your point about being able to read the previous posts when commenting is spot on. I find myself opening a couple of windows just so I can be sure of replying coherently to earlier posts.

I still prefer reading light text on a dark background, though...

Bri.