Open tobous opened 4 years ago
Wow, thanks. Some issues are design decisions and I still have to fix multiple small issues, but I wanted to agree on a design before polishing it. Probably we should discuss this in a Screensharing session.
Some issues are design decisions
If you mean the no longer scrolling navbar and titlebar stuff, yes, it can be seen as a design decision. I put it in the category "issue/bug" as there was a similar issue with the old design. But If you feel like they should no longer scroll that is something that we can discuss.
@tobous I tried to fix all issues and reworked the header bar. I found the reason for the strange issue "The "Support" category displays the navbar of the category "Contribute"". My local jekyll version was 3.8.3 and the github action builds with 4.0 (which has a slightly adjusted rendering mechanism). As a follow-up I want to add information on the landing page concerning IntelliJ. However, I want to introduce the new page structure first before adding new content.
LGTM in general. Haven't found any other obvious issues with the current layout. (Header bar sometimes looks a little weird for different width in the mobile view, but that is acceptable in my opinion.)
There is still some nitpicky stuff regarding capitalization, spelling, and punctuation marks, but that can be addressed in the code review for the PR.
But I still have one big issue (landing page) and one smaller, subjective issue (TOC highlighting):
I am still not happy with the landing page.
First of all, the ordering of the sections seems confusing to me. I would suggest first explaining the plugin functionality before mentioning data security/privacy.
With the current ordering, you have a nice introduction: the headline talks about "collaborative development", followed by the gif showing "collaboration." But after that, without any further context or explanation of what the plugin does, you talk about data privacy (after that about awareness information and only then about what the collaborative aspect of Saros actually is). As you haven't really explained the core functionality of Saros yet, readers won't really know what to make of the gif (which is why I put the collaboration in quotation marks; without any context, it is hard to understand that the shown windows are supposed to represent different instances that are synchronized across the network; you tried to alleviate the problem by introducing a gap between the windows, but I don't think it helps much without any context).
It seems weird to me to put data privacy in the spotlight as it is not a core feature or design aspect of Saros but rather a byproduct of how it was build (if I understand it correctly; maybe I am mistaken and it was an initial design decision; either way, it is not something we are frequently talking about when thinking about the feature scope/design of Saros).
I know that data privacy is an important factor to differentiate the plugin from other solutions offering remote collaboration and to potentially draw in enterprise users, but I still think we should first properly explain what the plugin does.
An issue for such a reordering would be that it no longer fits the current layout scheme (text -> picture -> text -> picture ...), as it also looks weird to position the privacy text between "Awareness Information" and "Follow-Mode".
As hinted at before, I am also not happy with the "Awareness Information" section. The layout still looks weird, even without the viewport annotation listing. Furthermore, it sells the awareness information Saros provides short in my opinion.
With
Saros provides far more awareness information that suggested by this section.
I get that you are trying to keep it to the basics in this post, but, with the new layout, this information is also mentioned nowhere else on the page.
So how about adding a button to the section leading to a more detailed screenshot page as it existed on the old/current page?
I am still not a big fan of the TOC highlighting.
(I found another weird side-effect of the TOC highlighting to add to the list: On pages that are short enough to not need a scroll bar, the last entry of the TOC is always highlighted. See here.)
In general, I would suggest to remove the highlighting as the edge cases seem confusing and it doesn't provide that much of a benefit. But that is just my opinion. If I am in the minority here, I also don't mind keeping it in.
Ok, so I will prepare a WIP PR (without the scrollspy / toc highlighting (we can discuss the highlighting issues in the future)) with some TODOs.
Design descition we should discuss
- [ ] The navbar on the left no longer scrolls with the view but rather remains at the top of the page. This makes it harder to navigate the site as we have quite a few long pages.
- [ ] The titlebar no longer scrolls with the view but rather remains at the top of the page. This makes it harder to navigate the site as we have quite a few long pages. This also goes for the landing page.
The two design decisions on the behavior of the title-bar (on the top) and nav-bar (on the left) are still open.
As already mentioned, I think both of them scrolling with the view would offer the best usability as it allows the user to always directly navigate to whatever other page they want to go to without having to scroll to the top of the page. Especially with the nav-bar, it allows the user to always get a quick overview over which other pages are part of the current topic. (Also, the nav-bar would only take up unused space anyways, so I don't see much of a reason to not have it always be visible/scroll with the view except for "distracting the reader".)
@m273d15 If I remember correctly, you like the behavior the way it is. Could you present your argument as to why (or what you don't like about the scrolling behavior)?
@stefaus What is your opinion on the matter (as the potential tie-breaker :wink:)?
This all related to the prototype for the new page layout, available here (but probably only temporarily).
Issues I have found found so far:
Design descition we should discuss
Notes on the design: