[flagged]
idk, the demo thingy looks great.
Kiki – a tiny homepage construction kit with a small footprint
11–20 of 93 posts
Re: Kiki – a tiny homepage construction kit with a small footprint
#12[flagged]
It is for sure readable, why so dramatic?
My vision isn’t great and I do find it more difficult to read comfortably than most sites. I haven’t checked the actual contrast ratio, but for this particular font and size the text color feels like it’s lacking strong contrast against the background. The tabs at the top are even more difficult to read comfortably than.
But I understand that sites that look this way are not made for maximum legibility, but as an in-group signifier.
Re: Kiki – a tiny homepage construction kit with a small footprint
#13Re: Kiki – a tiny homepage construction kit with a small footprint
#14Reminds me of a time when my homepage (before lj blog) was using cmsimple. BTW, c still exists. Not sure if it is still "simple" tho.
Re: Kiki – a tiny homepage construction kit with a small footprint
#15Should have been written with bouba philosophy.
Re: Kiki – a tiny homepage construction kit with a small footprint
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. There is a link to a demo website, which is in fact in similar style. 2. I don't think the website is _nearly unreadable_. 3. Pretty rude remark.
> 2. I don't think the website is _nearly unreadable_. For me personally, the color scheme is uncomfortable to read. Dark text on a dark background
It's the decades-old problem of blue on black, which has led to interminable discussions of which exact tint of blue should be ECMA-45 blue on a terminal. Pick one, it has poor contrast with a black background. Pick another, it has poor contrast with a white background.
* https://invisible-island.net/xterm/xterm.faq.html#dont_like_...
Re: Kiki – a tiny homepage construction kit with a small footprint
#17[flagged]
HN Guidelines: "Be kind. Don't be snarky. [...] Don't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine, but please don't be rigidly or generically negative. [...] Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
Re: Kiki – a tiny homepage construction kit with a small footprint
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
try the demo. it’s an entirely different style, which shows how versatile the tool is
It still doesn't reflect the design philosophy at all, though. A wacky approximation of early MacOS that offers nonfunctional UI affordances doesn't fit my bill of No obscurantist programming languages and styles , or simple, maintainable software akin to machines that need to work under all circumstances in the far north. I was also a little disappointed with the philosophy's goals in general, which seem to be mostl…
> I was also a little disappointed with the philosophy's goals in general, which seem to be mostly the personal preferences of a lone-wolf style open source developer, not a universal approach to software design.
How would a universal approach to software design be in any way appropriate for this?
Re: Kiki – a tiny homepage construction kit with a small footprint
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is for sure readable, why so dramatic?
The text flows over the whole width is one point, the paddings and margins is another one. Sure, you can read this if you really want, but it's painful.
I would like to introduce a wild concept -- browser window is resizable.
Re: Kiki – a tiny homepage construction kit with a small footprint
#20[flagged]
if you move your mouse to the edge of your browser window it turns into a little bidiretional arrow, if you click then drag you can make your window more narrow until it suits your desired reading preference