CSS for HTML output

[Paul W. Frields]

Pursuant to the following bug:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=159147

...I made some changes to the CSS in the Docs Project CVS.  Rahul was
looking (correctly, Karsten and I think) for a look that would
differentiate our docs from Red Hat's.  Most of our style sheet comes
from the one that Red Hat uses, in particular the coloration of headings
and admonitions.

I moved the headings to a blue color taken directly from the Fedora web
site CSS (the sidebar, to be more specific), and for the admonition
boxes, I came up with a yellow that is hopefully attention-getting
without being garish.  I left the coloration of screen sections alone
since there wasn't a clear reason to change it.  Refer to a mock-up here
to avoid having to build anything yourself:

http://docs.frields.org/mirror-tutorial-en/sn-planning-and-setup.html

If I can speak for Karsten, pursuant to a conversation we had today, we
would like to know what people think about adopting this CSS for DocBook
generated pages on the fedora.redhat.com web site.

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/

[Thomas Jones]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 29 July 2005 13:39, Paul W. Frields wrote:
<snip>
>  If I can speak for Karsten, pursuant to a conversation we had today,
> we
>  would like to know what people think about adopting this CSS for DocBook
>  generated pages on the fedora.redhat.com web site. 
Personally, I like the changes. 

However, I would like to make one suggestion somewhat related to the changes 
currently implemented. Could we get a declared hyperlink color designation? 
Right now, the color is system and/or browser independent. Seems as though if 
a standardized "look and feel" of the documentation is the intention that 
this also should be included in the stylesheet as well. Otherwise, the 
documentation is rendered inconsistently for the end-user base.

Just a suggestion.
Thomas
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFC6eYvoR5cE1e/kEIRAo3fAJ4txeyzgAt5zy296FtZ1hDr+2zVzgCgix29
> fgnWPAfgbRmEIrTjFAVIlbM=
> =YZO3
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Thomas Jones]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 29 July 2005 16:23, Paul W. Frields wrote:

>  Isn't the color system and/or browser *dependent*?  In other words, the
>  links are colored exactly the way any generic link is colored for the
>  end user, meaning they don't see anything they don't recognize.
>  However, I'm not against changing them, as long as we (a) agree on what
>  sticks out without sticking out TOO much, and (b) it is nicely
>  Fedora-like. 
Oops...you are right. ;) The "generic" link is inherently capable of being 
different on every node. Which brings to light the issue of fedora-like 
representation to the end-user.

I like what yourself and Karsten have done with the new scheme. I personally 
would think that some colors that promote a fedora-like visual appearance 
would be great. The accepted standard of blue/purple are a safe bet. But then 
again another selection from you/Karsten may provide more cohesion with the 
new scheme.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFC6gzJoR5cE1e/kEIRArbXAJ9dny/ScL+ixm9fAWB4UDRVzvdBIACgyxKl
> HyG3k6usCG2Jq9NhXneaO/4=
> =3VRY
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Thomas Jones]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 29 July 2005 20:47, Paul W. Frields wrote:
<snip>
>  I made another change to the heading color and link colors, this time to
>  be more adherent to the official web site.  I think you'll like the
>  results!  Please check the mockup at:
>
>  http://docs.frields.org/mirror-tutorial-en/sn-planning-and-setup.html 
Awesome! IMHO, I think that it perfectly represents the fedora appearance. You 
hit it right on the head. ;)

Anybody else's opinion?
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFC6jVroR5cE1e/kEIRAiTGAJ9Y8V4YAOFQgWkDtnWGqAWKLwFDSgCfWUph
> m1odrAOC3Pq0U34SFhSeAd0=
> =5PCk
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Karsten Wade]

On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 03:17 -0500, Thomas Jones wrote:

>  However, I would like to make one suggestion somewhat related to the
> changes 
>  currently implemented. Could we get a declared hyperlink color designation? 
>  Right now, the color is system and/or browser independent. Seems as though if 
>  a standardized "look and feel" of the documentation is the intention that 
>  this also should be included in the stylesheet as well. Otherwise, the 
>  documentation is rendered inconsistently for the end-user base. 
We could do that, makes sense.  Any reason not to use the good ol'
default blue? and purple for vlink?

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint:  2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115    5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41   
                       Red Hat SELinux Guide
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/

[Paul W. Frields]

On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 13:20 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
>  On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 03:17 -0500, Thomas Jones wrote:
>  
>  > However, I would like to make one suggestion somewhat related to the changes 
>  > currently implemented. Could we get a declared hyperlink color designation? 
>  > Right now, the color is system and/or browser independent. Seems as though if 
>  > a standardized "look and feel" of the documentation is the intention that
>
>  > this also should be included in the stylesheet as well. Otherwise, the 
>  > documentation is rendered inconsistently for the end-user base.
>  
>  We could do that, makes sense.  Any reason not to use the good ol'
>  default blue? and purple for vlink? 
Isn't the color system and/or browser *dependent*?  In other words, the
links are colored exactly the way any generic link is colored for the
end user, meaning they don't see anything they don't recognize.
However, I'm not against changing them, as long as we (a) agree on what
sticks out without sticking out TOO much, and (b) it is nicely
Fedora-like.

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/

[Paul W. Frields]

On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 06:02 -0500, Thomas Jones wrote:
>  On Friday 29 July 2005 16:23, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>  > Isn't the color system and/or browser *dependent*?  In other words, the
>  > links are colored exactly the way any generic link is colored for the
>  > end user, meaning they don't see anything they don't recognize.
>  > However, I'm not against changing them, as long as we (a) agree on what
>  > sticks out without sticking out TOO much, and (b) it is nicely
>  > Fedora-like.
>  
>  Oops...you are right. ;) The "generic" link is inherently capable of being 
>  different on every node. Which brings to light the issue of fedora-like 
>  representation to the end-user.
>  
>  I like what yourself and Karsten have done with the new scheme. I personally 
>  would think that some colors that promote a fedora-like visual appearance 
>  would be great. The accepted standard of blue/purple are a safe bet. But then 
>  again another selection from you/Karsten may provide more cohesion with the 
>  new scheme. 
I made another change to the heading color and link colors, this time to
be more adherent to the official web site.  I think you'll like the
results!  Please check the mockup at:

http://docs.frields.org/mirror-tutorial-en/sn-planning-and-setup.html

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/

[Karsten Wade]

On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 08:55 -0500, Thomas Jones wrote:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>  
>  On Friday 29 July 2005 20:47, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>  <snip>
>  >
>  > I made another change to the heading color and link colors, this time to
>  > be more adherent to the official web site.  I think you'll like the
>  > results!  Please check the mockup at:
>  >
>  > http://docs.frields.org/mirror-tutorial-en/sn-planning-and-setup.html
>  
>  Awesome! IMHO, I think that it perfectly represents the fedora appearance. You 
>  hit it right on the head. ;)
>  
>  Anybody else's opinion? 
Totally.  The lightening of the header blue makes them stand out, the
contrasts are all nice.
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE * Sr. Tech Writer * http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint:  2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115    5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41   
                       Red Hat SELinux Guide
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/enterprise/RHEL-4-Manual/selinux-guide/

[Tammy Fox]

Very nice Paul. Definitely looks more "Fedora-like" than the CSS we
inherited from the enterprise docs.

Tammy

On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 14:39 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>  Pursuant to the following bug:
>  
>  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=159147
>  
>  ...I made some changes to the CSS in the Docs Project CVS.  Rahul was
>  looking (correctly, Karsten and I think) for a look that would
>  differentiate our docs from Red Hat's.  Most of our style sheet comes
>  from the one that Red Hat uses, in particular the coloration of headings
>  and admonitions.
>  
>  I moved the headings to a blue color taken directly from the Fedora web
>  site CSS (the sidebar, to be more specific), and for the admonition
>  boxes, I came up with a yellow that is hopefully attention-getting
>  without being garish.  I left the coloration of screen sections alone
>  since there wasn't a clear reason to change it.  Refer to a mock-up here
>  to avoid having to build anything yourself:
>  
>  http://docs.frields.org/mirror-tutorial-en/sn-planning-and-setup.html
>  
>  If I can speak for Karsten, pursuant to a conversation we had today, we
>  would like to know what people think about adopting this CSS for DocBook
>  generated pages on the fedora.redhat.com web site.
>  
>  -- 
>  fedora-docs-list mailing list
>  fedora-docs-list(a)redhat.com
>  To unsubscribe: 
>  http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list 
--