forum redesign

[#1]

Its much better now without the pale pink stuff - thanks Mitch. But personally I agree with Jim that the Quote etc buttons are too dominant and the alternative example he gives has equivalents that are much less intrusive yet are just as clear and functional.

[#2]

Guys,
Is it worth us pushing ahead to build these?  We can always tweak buttons etc later.
This doesn't preclude any further design work.  SMF happily supports having multiple skins.

[#3]

I like Mitch's design 🙂

[#4]

Okay.  Dense hat on. Forgive my ignorance of the correct terminology for such things, but I'd appreciate some clarity here.
Does "build the skins" mean, simply, mock up a few pages in css (using the existing comm site layout template) with changed parameters, or does it mean something different from that?
As I understand things (not guaranteed to be a correct perception ), the visual appearance of the comm site is currently generated "off a template". So a new template (skin?) could, for example, have a single change on it (like table borders, or a different colour than the purple, or a different font face, or a call-up of a different set of icons).
Because the rest of us don't have access to the templates/css (other than the source code of, say, the comm site index) I originally mocked up the comm site index page (in ordinary html) as per http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php?topic=367.msg3614#msg3614 (left-hand borders thread).
Having finally created that layout (long process) I then had access to a means of changing various parameters. So I would appreciate some clarity is to whether changing a parameter on the alternate layout (a fairly brief process) is a whole different ballgame to changing-a-parameter-on-a-comm-site-template, if (?) that is what "building a new skin" actually means.
*****
There seem to be a number of primary factors that people have varying views about:
width/visibility of the borders - thick borders, thin borders, no borders
width variables - full width, mid-width (some parts not others), all indented
darkness of the text (both size -1 and size -2)
text font used (ie font face, type of lettering).
emboldened links throughout (or not) (including on post pages)
colour backgrounds
choice of smiley sets
choice of icon sets
*****
There is also the factor of the underlying "type of layout".  The existing "template" - comm site original - has a different overall layout from the one I designed - not a great many changes but primarily the settings at the top and bottom, as demonstrated by the difference between the morphed layouts - here (logged-in and logged-out pages in three varying widths) - and the comm site template original - here .
But however the Comm Site ends up, will be based on "a layout" - whether it's the former or the latter, or something any other person here designs - changing the parameters (eg the changes made during the morph (00-10) is a different thing entirely from changing the layout.
I only have the html-layout-version I made, to work with (obviously!) but for whatever it's worth I've made a few examples of "change types" (the sort that I've seen people request in these forums). I've mocked up a few progressions with minimal borders (to suit, it seems, most people) and widened the mid70s and all70s to mid75s and all75s (ie 75%-wide central bit, which is narrower than the existing comm site template (CST) for the post-widths (80%?), although the "big table" on the CST logged-out page looks to be at around 72% and the logged-in page of the existing CST looks here, at any rate, to be left-indented further than the logged-out version).  I don't see any particular logic (sorry) in the width varying from one CST page to another within a single set-up (or skin?).
I've also changed the "small font face" to Verdana (which I discovered on the logged-in-version would actually embolden in small font, ie size="-2") in various places, to give a clearer idea of what might be possible.
There are "two sets" - one "purple", like the existing forum layout (all the folders with "morph" at the front) and a similar set of changes to the design I mocked up originally (all the ones with "test" at the front, in the newset04 folder.
*****
Given the noticeable lack of "staff comment" on the customization thread - http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php?topic=492.0 - I have no way of knowing whether change-it-to-suit-your-own-requirements is going to be offered to members of these forums.  I don't (entirely) see the logic of not enabling it, given that so many people actively dislike the current visual aspects of the comm site forums whilst others think it's absolutely perfect (and individual customization would allow both sets of people to be equally happy with the outcome).
Regards,
Penny.

[#5]

Further to the above post (drafted a day or two back, but not posted then as I was waiting to see how other people replied on this thread) there have been some further thoughts which I include below, in some attempt at identifying *why* it's important this Community Site becomes (visually at least) all that it's capable of.
Bright pages with good colour contrasts engage an audience, make a page memorable, bring people back.
Surreal is fine (I like surreal). But largely-pale pages set against a white background, with meandering side borders (from one page to the next, or within a page) and huge gaps at the foot of the webpage don't come across as "finished", or surreal either, come to that.  They just look scrappy, like it wasn't important to get it right.
Such things might not appear "important".  But this is a *community site*, designed to be all things to all people, somewhere where 200,000 PN-group customers can get to know one another (quite aside from the practicalities of gaining or imparting info on how Internet connections can be made the most of, and such like).
Whatever "format" these pages eventually take has to be "broadly appealing" to the majority of PN-group customers.  Which, tbh, at present they aren't, judging by the unprecedented volume of complaints about the visual appearance.
If a "default format" can be designed that is eye-catching but clear and definite and well-integrated, then "customization" can offer each forum member the opportunity to fine-tune to suit their own preferences.  Be those blue and purple, or black and gold, or monochrome, or whatever, with thin borders, thick borders, dark background, white background, dark text, pale text (etc. etc.).
At odd spare moments spread out over the last few days I mocked-up the two sequences at set04.
(1) a standardised version of "the purple pages" with a number of minor parameter changes x logged-out and logged-in formats in three width varieties
(2) a similar sort of sequence of the blue-and-orange page I made originally, showing how it would look with various types of parameters changed.
The sequences are designed to show what fine-tuning could offer in terms of altered visual appearance.  Both sets are from "one layout" (but they offer a wide variety of different outcomes to perhaps-suit the individual expressed preferences of a lot of people here).  Clearly these are just *two* examples of "possible colour combinations", laid out in a variety of formats drawn from a single overall layout.

Why have I bothered to do this?  Really can't answer that. I've been a part of the F9/PN "community" for nine years now (albeit we never before had a meeting-place to which PN shepherded customers-en-masse) and we have the chance to create something here that's uniquely different from any other ISP-enabled "community".
"How things look, visually" is likely to be a significant aspect of that, and anything that can be done to make this whole "community" area somewhere people will choose to spend time, and get involved, and feel at home, is *important*.

Yes perhaps it would be "easier" to choose few default formats (skins?) and limit the colour / design choices available to forum members.  But it would be no more time-consuming to identify a "default layout" that's "broadly okay" and enable each individual to set up "their personal view" exactly how they like.
*something* needs to change, for this community site to be "got right".  I guess I would just not like to see "the purple pages" become an epitaph to "PlusNet Past".
Regards,
Penny.

[#6]

I have come up with a number of different looks for the Forum to go in the pot for the Forums Redesign.
At spare moments spread out over the last few days I mocked-up the 2 sequences at:
Sequence - 1
http://users.plus.net/QL:7D755276
http://users.plus.net/QL:9584945A
http://users.plus.net/QL:921139E5
http://users.plus.net/QL:E464EF47
http://users.plus.net/QL:4A44F1C4
Sequence - 2
http://users.plus.net/QL:F2174B5E
http://users.plus.net/QL:8FFB64E7
http://users.plus.net/QL:2BC1C628
http://users.plus.net/QL:9DF61915
http://users.plus.net/QL:3C802A46
To tidy up my links I have shortened them with "Quick links" from plusnet userTools. 
Have a look and see watt you think.
Clearly these are just *two* examples of "possible colour combinations", laid out in a variety of formats drawn from a single overall layout.
Why have I bothered to do this?  Because I am Dyslexic and the present layout is not suitable for a number of people.

[#7]

Mitch,
I like your layouts, look OK to me....

[#8]

Orange is not my favourite colour but I have to say that I really like the clarity and tidiness of your work. It makes things so much easier to identify and read.  I can see why it would help people with dyslexia. 

[#9]

I have come up with some more different looks for the Forum to go in the pot for the Forums Redesign.
At spare moments spread I mocked-up the following:
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/v3/01.html
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/v3/02.html
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/v3/03.html
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/v3/04.html
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/v3/05.html
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/v3/06.html
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/v3/07.html
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/v3/08.html
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/v3/09.html
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/v3/10.html
Thank you "poppy" for the feed back much appreciated. 

[#10]

Mitch Ar you going to build a new set of skins for the forum?  or has the idea been put on the back burner?    Never to see the light of day or ar you working on a new set of skins for the forum. 
It has been some time since a post from the PlusNet teem posted a comment on a new look for the forum. 

[#11]

Hi Guys,
Unfortunately Mitch is actually off sick today, so you'll have to put up with me! 
Apologies for not giving you an update sooner! Yes Mitch is working on the update to the forums skins at the moment. This though is taking longer than we first expected as the SMF forums are not built using CSS and use standard HTML 4.0 coding (Font tags etc).
Due to this we have made the decision to modify the templates into CSS valid code so this will allow us in future to re-skin them if we wish much more easily, hence the work now will save time in the future 
Initially we were hoping to have this on the “Beta” community site this week, but due to the mammoth amount of template work to get them into CSS I think it will take us more time. As I said Mitch is off sick today, but should hopefully be back tomorrow. I will get him to post you an update on his progress and when we can realistically expect to see the work completed.
Thanks!
Jonny

[#12]

Hi jwing

You ar wrong the SMF forums are built using CSS, if you look at the coding of this page you will see this:
http://community.plus.net/forum/Themes/plusn/style.css?fin11
So this page is built with CSS, but my different looks for the Forum ar not built with CSS they ar built with HTML
Because I don't no CSS coding.   
To make it easier for you I have cleaned up the "page source" at:
http://www.tdadyslexia.plus.com/forum_redesign/Page_Coding.html
And I have highlighted it for you as well 
Not bad for a Dyslexic hey?   

[#13]

You are indeed right, and I now feel stupid (egg on my face!) 
Right, firstly can I apologies for not being quite right in my explanation I think there was a misunderstanding on my behalf about what is being worked on. I have spoken with Mitch on his "sick bed" and this is what I now understand the changes to be:
Yes the forums are indeed in some form of CSS but they do apparently have some "older" code in the actual template files which stops us making major layout changes to the forums easily, hence it’s currently not just a case of changing the stylesheet to majorly change the design layout.
We can obviously change colors easily using the stylesheets currently but more major work means we have to change the templates and certain elements of the code each time we want to do a new design. So if we optimise the templates to be CSS driven this means we can add new skins/themes much more easily in the future.
I will clarify all this with Mitch on his return and will get him to update you if I have got anything wrong (I obviously didnt want to bother him for too long with him being ill).
Apologies again for the misunderstanding, I am now off to stand in the corner of the office and think about what I have done wrong

Thanks
Jonny

[#14]

Hi jwing
Thank you for that and geting back so quickly. 
Plus thank you to Mitch for his help from his sick bed. 

[#15]

Without appearing blunt, the purple on white background is simply awful.
My eyesight is also pretty awful, please change the font colour to black or at least to something more readable.
Or at the very least allow users to change the font colour via the portal profile.
Many thanks, Paul.
EDIT - ( on the actual thread index)
EDIT - after much squinting I see these issues are being addressed in another thread, however please please please in the meantime change the thread colour to black, surely it cannot be that difficult. I simply cannot navigate around the forums without severely straining my eyes.
EDIT - On a side note, I appreciate somebody wants to show off their creativity with altering the layout etc, but was there anything actually wrong with the old forum layout? It was simple, concise and readable, exactly what a community forum should be.
Moderators note by James_H : Merged into ongoing thread.