[Rubyinstaller-devel] rubyinstaller.org placeholder page needs feedback

Jon jon.forums at gmail.com
Tue Aug 11 22:53:48 EDT 2009

> Looking good in IE 7 & 8 on Vista. IE6 is almost there - I'm seeing the 
> same problem you have already identified. IE5... don't even go there. ;)
> Also looking fine on Safari 4, Opera 9 & 10, Chrome and Firefox.

Thanks for checking these!

FYI, on my time-stealing list, my remaining TODO items are:

* Clean up IE6 lower icon bar issue
* Check XUbuntu/FF
* Create an Add-on placeholder page
* Tweak the existing Download placeholder page
* Clean up front summary text

> Something that immediately occurred to me: nowhere does it mention that 
> this is RubyInstaller *for Windows*. Although pretty obvious to those in 
> the community, for beginners - who are a large part of the audience - it 
> might not be so obvious.
> Perhaps instead of "one-click away" (which I think is a bit inaccurate 
> and somewhat redundant these days) it should say "for Windows" instead. 
> And then in the intro text say, "This is a self-contained installer for 
> Windows that..."

I've had similar thoughts and think your suggestion would be fine as long as we use Windows(R) or Windows(TM) or something similar.  I'll check around a bit, but do you know for sure what should be used?

> Regarding the HTML, I agree with the points others have made: use of JS 
> for links is making my teeth itch. ;) The url attribute in the divs is 
> rather unorthadox (it doesn't exist in the XHTML spec).

Would hate for your teeth to itch, except for maybe from a Macallan 25 :)

The url attribute is gone (as well as those W3C validation errors) but as I'm doing quick-n-dirty "HTML/CSS div buttons" and wrapping them in links, we're still failing validation.  That said, things seem to be working in all the major browsers.

I want to try one more thing to get XHTML valid, but I'm not that concerned as I see no need to put an ugly W3C graphic on the page, and it's a placeholder page until the real site comes up.

As Pavel generates the graphic buttons to use for the real site, I'll move them over to our placeholder page.  That said, please let me know if the current "buttons" cause problems in any of the browsers.

Thanks for the nav feedback and I've made the change just a few minutes ago and am using something like the following with some CSS trickery

<div id="navbar">
   <a href="foo">About</a>

seems to be working OK and is fewer keystrokes :)  check out the current navbar and see if you have any problems.

> The growing consensus in the web design community is that writing markup 
> with HTML 5 semantics in mind is a sensible idea.

Good links, thanks!

> Radiant now uses HAML doesn't it? This should actually make it 
> super-easy to write and maintain the HTML.

FWIW, I'm a fan of Sinatra + HAML + Sequel + Rack.  Would be kinda cool to have done our placeholder site done using Sinatra. :)

More information about the Rubyinstaller-devel mailing list