Documentation visual style feedback

[czardas]

The red strings are certainly clearer to read than in the current colour scheme. It was just a consideration that struck me. I'm not qualified to judge the effect, but I know my eyes get tired after several hours looking at a screen. Perhaps the new colours will have the opposite effect.

[Valik]

My colors are based mostly on Visual Studio's style. At this point I don't exactly know what Visual Studio's default colors are as I always ensure they match what I'm accustomed to. The main rationale behind the scheme is to make sure everything is visually distinct. You can look at something and know what it is by it's color rather than it's context.

Edited December 12, 2011 by Valik
Missing letter.

[czardas]

Well if it works for you. I'll give it a try for a while also.

[wraithdu]

I really like the new style. I liked the first version as well, but the small modification cleaned it up nicely. Thanks for all your work tracexxx (and others) on the style and the docs and the language itself. It's not said enough, and your time and effort is greatly appreciated!!!

[trancexx]

I really like the new style. I liked the first version as well, but the small modification cleaned it up nicely. Thanks for all your work tracexxx (and others) on the style and the docs and the language itself. It's not said enough, and your time and effort is greatly appreciated!!!

That's great, thanks.

A proportional excellence of function pages the old beta had is lost now (fucked up is better term). But as long as most people likes it, I'm fine with it.

[MvGulik]

Mmm, the fog on the code blocks has cleared up somewhat. Still somewhat misty though. Guess I need to up my fonts a bit.

If all code parts are intended to be dressed up with a border. There a some naked ones in the FAQ page.

Edited December 13, 2011 by MvGulik

[DaleHohm]

I would like to see the white space before and after sections be reduced by another 40%. You are changing font size and color at each of the boudaries and I don't believe so much white space is required to deliniate the sections.

Dale

[Valik]

Removing additional whitespace changes them from a new visual style to little more than a pallet swap of the old style. I actually think we've almost reduced the whitespace too much in the last version but it does allow for more information to be presented so I'm okay with it.

There may be minor inconsistencies in how certain things look with the next release. This is because some style information is hard-coded into the HTML. After the release the documentation is going to be cleaned up to correctly separate out all the formatting stuff to a CSS file.

[AZJIO]

Variables and macros can highlight a

$HTML=StringRegExpReplace($HTML, '(?<!w)($[w][]+?|WS_[A-Z]+)(?![w][])', '<span class="S91">1</span>')
$HTML=StringRegExpReplace($HTML, '(?<![w@])(@[w)(]+?)(?![w@)(])', '<span class="Macro">1</span>')

Edited December 14, 2011 by AZJIO

[czardas]

Is there a separate download link for the chm, or do I have to install the beta to check the Help File?

Edited December 15, 2011 by czardas

[Valik]

It's in the standalone SFX for the beta.

[czardas]

Okay thanks. I'll give feedback shortly.

Edited December 15, 2011 by czardas

[czardas]

I haven't had much time to look at this until now. Here are my thoughts.

Regarding the yellow boxes (syntax) at the top of each reference page;

• I think the yellow should be lighter with less saturation.

Regarding the syntax highlighting colour scheme;

• I think the numbers and variables don't stand out as well as they did previously.

• The #cs comments could be a slightly darker grey.

I think the page layout is absolutely fine.

Edited December 16, 2011 by czardas

[Mat]

• I think the numbers and variables don't stand out as well as they did previously.

I think that's a good thing. Each to his own I guess.

[czardas]

I don't understand this. I think numbers should stand out since the syntax checking won't generally tell me if a number is incorrect. An incorrect function name is more likely to throw an error than an incorrect number, so finding numerical typos is perhaps more difficult. All the more reaon for numbers to be made to stand out. Stuff that can be easily checked by the interpreter need not stand out so much as stuff that requires visual checking.

[Valik]

I view your logic as somewhat flawed. You are correlating what is essentially brightness when what you really need to look for is difference. As long as all the colors are visually distinct (or duplicate colors are applied to items you cannot confuse for each other) then that's all that really matters. From there it is simply a matter of training your brain to process what you are seeing.

Says the person who uses a bright blue font for numbers (and keywords).

[czardas]

LOL, says the person who writes most of his pseudo code in notepad.

[Tweaky]

I want to create the german help file for 3.3.8.1, but with the old colors style from 3.3.6.1

What must I change, so that I can do this?

Edited March 26, 2012 by Tweaky

[GEOSoft]

just change the style sheet.

[Tweaky]

What do you mean with "style sheet".

I've already set the old color scheme in Scite.