Chris Parker Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Looks fine except for the forced fixed width. Maybe a preference that could be cookied that would allow those of us with large screens (higher resolution) to more effectively use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eaolson Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Also, "refineing" should be "refining." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonbroth Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Looks fine except for the forced fixed width. Maybe a preference that could be cookied that would allow those of us with large screens (higher resolution) to more effectively use them. That fixed width makes the "Held Mail" screen less user-friendly - held message titles often wrap around onto a second line, making it harder to skim through dozens at a time than previously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenUnderwood Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 In addition to using the entire right hand side of the screen, may I suggest leaving the left column at the top of the screen so you don't need to scroll back to the top of the screen to access the "Check Mail" link for instance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.J.Mechelynck Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Looks fine except for the forced fixed width. Maybe a preference that could be cookied that would allow those of us with large screens (higher resolution) to more effectively use them. I agree that it should not be fixed-width but rather not set a width, so that however wide or narrow the user's screen definition or the font size chosen (in IE: Biggest/Big/Normal/Small/Smallest; in NS6+: 100%/120%/150%/200%/Other...), the whole width (no more, no less) be used. Also: Beware of clicking just to the right of the p in the "spamcop" banner. There has always been a link to a spamtrap there, but now it is no more on a different-colored background. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
julian Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Thanks for the feedback. The max width thing was hotly debated here (I'm not the only cook stirring this pot these days). Swappable styles was something I had in reserve, and I have added that feature now. The default is still the fixed-width layout, but there are now various wider options. Happy to hear it's working well otherwise. I fixed the spelling and the color of that trap link. Hope that helps. Enjoy! OH, BTW, some of the changes to styles or the java scri_pt behind them may take a while to show up (max 1 hour), since they get cached by akamai (I'm refreshing the cache manually, but it still takes a few minutes to propagate). -=Julian=- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.J.Mechelynck Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Thanks for the feedback. The max width thing was hotly debated here (I'm not the only cook stirring this pot these days). Swappable styles was something I had in reserve, and I have added that feature now. The default is still the fixed-width layout, but there are now various wider options. Now I got a second SC cookie, name "style", vale "Default". I suppose it's OK though not in line with SC's previous custom of never setting a cookie until or unless asked for it. What boggles me is that that same cookie (my setting is "Ask me") gets set again, to the same value, whenever I visit an SC page, be it a reporting page, the FAQ, ... Well, that's just a minor annoyance. Question: What other styles are there? How can a nonpaying user choose between them? If he (i.e., I) can't, then why not bypass all that style-cookie business for free users? Happy to hear it's working well otherwise. I fixed the spelling and the color of that trap link. [...] Color change didn't (yet?) work for me. I'm waiting to see if the next akamai cache refresh will make it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonbroth Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Thanks for the feedback. The max width thing was hotly debated here (I'm not the only cook stirring this pot these days). Swappable styles was something I had in reserve, and I have added that feature now. The default is still the fixed-width layout, but there are now various wider options. Oh, that's just *lovely*. Thank you ever so much for the prompt, perfect response. While I'm here, Julian, can I just say that without SpamCop my email would be completely unusable? Your system is superb. I just want you to know how much I appreciate it. Cheers, Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.J.Mechelynck Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Question: What other styles are there? How can a nonpaying user choose between them? If he (i.e., I) can't, then why not bypass all that style-cookie business for free users? OK, I found it, it's a rolldown menu at left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Parker Posted June 24, 2004 Author Share Posted June 24, 2004 Thanks for the feedback. The max width thing was hotly debated here (I'm not the only cook stirring this pot these days). Swappable styles was something I had in reserve, and I have added that feature now. The default is still the fixed-width layout, but there are now various wider options. Hmm. WIDE does not appear to auto-update under IE 6 on XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 ...Wazoo -- move to Lounge? Wow .. I'm getting confused ... I hit the E-Mail Forum before this one .. did move a post out of there ... but now see a reference to Held Mail here, so it appears that the "new look" is more than just the reporting screen being discussed over in the newsgroups. .... looks like a possible "merge" needed ... but noted that not all of the responses thus far actually have a link back to what's being responded to .. might end up looking like quite a mess that way ..?? hmmm ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turetzsr Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 ...Wazoo -- move to Lounge? Wow .. I'm getting confused ... I hit the E-Mail Forum before this one .. did move a post out of there ... but now see a reference to Held Mail here, so it appears that the "new look" is more than just the reporting screen being discussed over in the newsgroups. .... looks like a possible "merge" needed ... but noted that not all of the responses thus far actually have a link back to what's being responded to .. might end up looking like quite a mess that way ..?? hmmm ... ...Merge might not be appropriate, as different questions and comments are being raised about the "New Look" in the different posts. However, since these don't seem to meet the generally approved topics for the "Help" forum (that is, questions about the SpamCop reporting capability and "why am I blocked" type questions), they don't seem to belong here.... <g> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Yeah, after looking through them, comments are all over the place. Made a new Announcements post to advise (and request) that all these "new look" things are to be found in the Lounge ... also kicked off a bit of a note to a couple of folks, thanking them for their heads-up <g> ... maybe JT will do a quickie and add a new Forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awkward42 Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 I've reported my first spam with the new look, and the received line on teh technical details screen breaks the border of the page (although it is still well within the width of the screen). All the other lines are fine. system details: win XP, moz 1.6, spamcop legacy fuel type reporting, Chris ps: I've no idea why the image link isnt' working - the address is fine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest art101 Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Just wanted to wade in here to say I very much like the new look for the HTML pages. IMHO, the navigation design is much more seamless (and the pages still load fast). I designed the new SpamCop logo a few years ago and this design is more along the lines of what I was hoping for in how it relates to the rest of the page(s). There's a structure and a grid that more easily identifies what's what. This look and user interface also works well for most consumers because it gives them something they're used to seeing. That's an important design principal. The previous page design felt a little too much like an intimidating sea of geektext. In the end, I think this page layout will make it easier for novice spam reporters to use SpamCop... which might generate more reports and SpamCop members... which might help ISPs all over the world (are you listening, China?) better understand the problem. Kudos to everyone who worked on the new design. I'm sure you'll iron out the (surprisingly few) kinks. Oh, almost forgot... it works and looks great in the Safari browser (Unix-based Mac OSX). Not so good in Opera, but passable. Updating the design was a good call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awkward42 Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 with all the defaults unchanged, the hostname stats page doesn't fit inside the border - the righthand edge runs through the middle of the 'a' in the word 'days' all teh way down teh page. same setup as before. screen resolution is 1024x768 Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgeller Posted June 25, 2004 Share Posted June 25, 2004 The new look does not work correctly with iCab, my primary browser, but is fine with Safari. Chances are it's them, but iCab does claim to be strictly 4.01 compliant.... (It lists a bunch of things it considers to be wrong with the page.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.