October 20, 2004
(Updated) Ch-ch-ch-ch-Changes
What The Hell Is Going On Here?
Note: This post has been updated. Any and all updates appear at the end of the original post.
Some changes to discuss, of various sorts. Most obviously, we've undergone a radical site redesign, intended to greatly simplify layout and access to our own content, moving much of the other information or data to internal pages accessible through a static menubar positioned at the bottom. As always with site redesigns, there may some lingering glitches, and we will address those as they become apparent.
Missing at least for the moment are the ads we've been taking here. We likely will restore them to the right-hand sidebar at some point, once we determine some design related issues in that regard. Originally, this new site design was motivated by the presumed end of this site next month, at which point we weren't going to be accepting new ads anyway, but we became impatient waiting to launch the new design, which has been ready for weeks.
Now, as to the November 30 drop-dead date. The first news is that it's possible as it stands right now that we actually now have until December 31 instead. So at the very least, a thirty day reprieve while some other things offer at least the glimmer of potential.
In addition to some discussions we'll be having with someone currently involved in the local election races, in the pipeline is our participation in a fundraising project that will be coming out of another local publication in the middle of November. We will discuss this further when the date grows closer, but for now we'll just say that it does offer the possibility of having a very specific structure through which we can raise funds, and includes some competitive aspects through which (related to amounts raised, or numbers of contributors) we could also receive bonus contributions.
Whether or not our participation in that project will directly lead to funding which offers long-term stability or a short-term extension of our drop-dead date is one of those things for which we will all just have to wait and see. Indirectly, however, it will also offer us an opportunity to expand the range of people who even know this site exists, so there also could be ripple effects in that sense as well.
We'll fill everyone in on the specifics when the time comes. And when that times comes, we will make it very obvious on this site just how everyone can participate through contributions via the mystery project in question.
In the meantime, the short-term issues are those of any possible bugs in the site redesign. Any of these likely will be the result of browser inconsistencies, and we will work on those as they crop up. Other than that, you might notice that the "About" link in the masthead along the bottom currently leads to a page error. That's because we haven't yet consolidate all of that information into a single new page, but expect that as the week moves along.
Update
We realized the the single most-common and immediate bug is something that's addressed in the comments to this item, but those encountering the bus might not be reading the comments. If you're still seeing a variation of the old design (with the negative-colored panorama), your browseer isn't licking up the changed stylesheet. So, go directly to that stylesheet, then reload/refresh it. Then come back to the main site here, and reload/refresh that.
Also, the text versus background issue is being worked on, although many people seem to be tying that issue to text-size, which is peculiar to us because the current text-size and the old text-size is appearing entirely the same for us over here, so we're not sure what other people are seeing on that count. That's separate from the sidebar text-size, which is definitely smaller than any size we used on the old design, so we'll address that separately.
Update
Regarding the background, it will change more likely than go away. Unfortunately, since all our trial versions of image editing software have long since expired, we can't make any of the necessary contrast adjustments at the moment, so give us a bit of time to make that part happen. Font and text matters forthcoming, but probably not until after we're had our morning coffee.
Update
Font size is bigger at the moment, but too big for our taste. We will be working on a middle ground between the current size and the one we had earlier that was too small. That will require an entire reworking of what we have in place for determining font sizes, but that's not a big deal.
Also, the background is temporarily removed, but will return after we toy with some alternative brightnesses and contrasts on that image file that a reader emailed to us. For now, we're using a gray color we lifted from a part of that background image.
Comments (21)
The One True b!X on 20 Oct 2004
One bug we have right away is a problem with the comment entry box appearing much lower on the page than everything else. That's going to take me some time to sort out.
Also, I'm pretty sure that comment preview is broken for the moment as well.
allehseya on 20 Oct 2004
I'm glad that you're being true to your heart with this project. I wish you the best of luck with the negotiations and I hope the outcome is as you hope it to be.
I know how frustrating it is to deal with new layouts -- and as such you probably don't want to hear this -- I like the old layout better (sorry). . .
The One True b!X on 20 Oct 2004
That's fine.
Me, I long since got tired of its clutter.
The One True b!X on 20 Oct 2004
Also, putting personal preference of design aside for the moment, the design might be outright broken for some people until their browser decides to re-get the stylesheet. If someone thinks that might be an issue, go directly to the stylesheet, his refresh or reload on that page, then come back to the main site and hit refresh or reload on that. If the new stylesheet wasn't been picked up originally, it will be after that.
Also, I'm aware that on short comments, the current comment layout looks a little... odd. I may be tinkering with that a bit in the future.
Marc Brazeau on 20 Oct 2004
The text against the textured background makes it really hard to read. It's a deal breaker for me.
And I just added you to my rss and made a new commitment to follow PDX news more. Damn!
Lea on 20 Oct 2004
Ah - yes, refreshing the stylesheet fixed my problem. Thanks!
David Parsons on 20 Oct 2004
The page background makes it harder to read. I've not got the best vision in the world and little text on top of a blurry text background makes it very noisy. I can manually increase the text size, but that spills over onto other websites that don't size their body text..
Spine on 20 Oct 2004
Agreed: because of the background image, the text is difficult to read. I'd go with a solid-color background, myself. Presently, the content is competing with the design more than it should have to.
Ric on 20 Oct 2004
The new view looks good here on the web page.
But, I use an RSS tool to get all my Blogs and well
it doesn't come thru as readable at all.
The previous layout did come thru, OK.
Robin on 20 Oct 2004
Couple design suggestions:
Keep the newsprint background, but put all text & comments in a nice clean white or off-white box. Also, consider changing the font to something other than a small serif font. Could be a personal preference on my part, but I find serif fonts on blogs generally a pain in the ass to read.
Also, a small aesthetic thing: I think the right-hand sidebar would look better with a small right-hand margin so that it's a box, rather than something that spills into the right-hand margin.
But all that aside, the fact that you're tinkering gives me hope that there's at least a sign of a short term reprieve and you won't vanish into the aether after November.
Aaron on 20 Oct 2004
Yikes! I'm going blind trying to read type over newsprint! You need a white background, b!X, or I'm never going to make it past the first paragraph of another post.
Bob R. on 20 Oct 2004
B!x -
I see you've received other comments along this line: The text is too small. The background is too busy against the text. Add me to the chorus.
It think you can improve things greatly, while maintaining the overall look, by increasing the text size and redoing the background with significantly less contrast in the newsprint pattern.
- Bob R.
Elaine of Kalilily on 20 Oct 2004
If I hold down Control and turn the wheel on my mouse, I can make the text size bigger and smaller. I find I have to do that on many weblogs, but when I do, it sure makes them easier to read.
I tend to prefer sanserif type as well. It's crisper, easier to read.
Mikey on 20 Oct 2004
What RSS reader is pulling the graphics and font type? Isn't the point of RSS that you get the stripped down text? I use Somniphobia (created locally!) and I have no problem reading it.
The One True b!X on 20 Oct 2004
Yeah I didn't understand the RSS question either. None of the feed files have been changed at all, for whatever it's worth.
The One True b!X on 20 Oct 2004
By the way, further tweaking will be on hold likely for the remainder of the evening, since Game 7 of the ALCS between the Red Sox and Yankees begins in less than an hour.
no one in particular on 21 Oct 2004
You said: Unfortunately, since all our trial versions of image editing software have long since expired, we can't make any of the necessary contrast adjustments at the moment, so give us a bit of time to make that part happen.
Most people complain about the interface being wonky (it's really the only image editor I've used, so I can't compare), but the GIMP is free and 2.0 runs nicely on Mac OS X and Windows.
You might kinda hate it, but it's better than nothing, and it can't be too painful for a simple thing like adjusting contrast...
Jeff on 21 Oct 2004
while some other things offer at least the glimmer of potential.
You know, this seems like a pretty good day to be nurturing glimmers of hope. If the Red Sox can come back from three down, maybe you can find funding.
That evil wind that's been blowing for years may finally have shifted...
Tamara on 26 Oct 2004
So, this might sound bizarre, but I would like it better if the links to stories were on the left side. Something about the way my eyes focus on the writing makes the right hand links a distraction.
The least of your cares I know, but every year or so I've got to put in my $.02 worth.
Anne Dufay on 26 Oct 2004
First - for a little perspective, the site looks entirely different on my home computer (Dell, with a small, flat-screen monitor, vs my work computer - oversize monitor, but otherwise standard issue.) Even the colors are different.
Computer geek stuff aside, MY biggest issue is that the summaries no longer say how many responses have been posted. So, to find out if there has been any further comment, I have to scroll down to the very bottom of the thread - rather than just note, huh, still only 93 responses – I can get back to what I was doing... :-)
GeneralPicture on 06 Nov 2004
Hey, b!x, I'm still not completely happy with your change in design. My laptop has pretty wide resolution, and your column expands to take up the whole width. This makes for long lines of text, and the font is a bit smallish. The whole look seems rather sterile and utilitarian.
If you should ever care for inspiration, take a look at the two current "featured" sites at Typepad, especially
http://www.hewnandhammered.com/
Now this is a Cadillac among blogs, to be sure, but it just shows what can be done. (I realize I need to scramble to get my own blog looking good!)
And I realize this may of course all be moot anyhows, since I notice you haven't been posting much lately...