Website look

jennyw jennyw at
Wed Apr 17 16:32:12 UTC 2002

The main problem I had with the Web site, back when I first looked at it, is
that it makes it look like Squeak isn't actively developed.  "Where is Squeak
Headed?" is dated Dec.  1999.  It would be nice if there was at least something
current to replace that, even if it's only a couple of paragraphs.  Just to let
people know that things are going on currently, and what has happened since
1999 (like the Squeak team leaving Disney).

Having something live on the site, like a Wiki or even the mailing list 
archives, might be nice.


On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 12:05:45PM +0100, goran.hultgren at wrote:
> Russell Allen <russell.allen at> wrote:
> > Hi Goran,
> > 
> > What in particular don't you like about the design?  Possibly
> > it is a little minimal, but it was intended to be a "strict, clean,
> > fastloading site with a 'good look'"...
> Thats good! :-)
> Well, I didn't mean to be negative - the site is quite ok, let me give
> some more constructive suggestions:
> I still think it could be made a little bit more polished,
> - The link-effect is ok but personally I would like them to be a little
> bit more "standing out". This can be done with underline (with perhaps a
> subtle colorchange on mouse-over for visual feedback) or at least making
> them more bold. At we have links without underline but we
> made them blue and a bit more bold.
> - Perhaps some other font(s) could be used to make it a bit less
> ordinary.
> - The headings feel a tad too large in general.
> - The index on the left could perhaps be made a bit more "slim". I like
> it in general but the rectangle with round corners around it feels a bit
> clunky.
> - The tables used for grouping stuff could perhaps be made a bit "less
> ordinary" too.
> - Server seems quite slow.
> - Font sizes are in pt, I think ems are much better. When I did
> I read up quite a lot on those issues and somewhere on
> some very informed site it said that ems are actually the only font-size
> unit worth using (since it takes both monitor size, resolution and
> personal preference in account)
> On the positive side:
> - Simple CSS for effects (instead of Javascript, thank you)
> - No frames (I hate them, thank you)
> - Seems to be proper HTML (good)
> Well, it's just personal thoughts. Take them with a grain of salt.
> > The main problem I would see in the web presence of Squeak is that most
> > of our contents (and there is a suprising amount) is on the swiki, not
> > on  Maybe we should merge the two, and only have the swiki
> > at
> Well, I am not sure about that. It is a problem that does
> not get updated that much but on the other hand it should be kept more
> "in line" than the Swiki. A simple "News/Announcements" section on the
> first page might make it more interesting.
> Btw - perhaps we should change the wording "Squeak comes under an open
> source license" to perhaps "Squeak has a very liberal license" or
> something like that. I think the last word on OpenSource certification
> was that SqueakL is NOT OpenSource.
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Russell
> regards, Göran

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list