-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Generally I'm against adding white space to designs. I'm trying to read a million posts quickly here, not relax in the ample space provided by hilarious line-heights.
But my suggestion is that anchors get bolded or have some kind of text-decoration. At least to my eyes, it's now difficult to see when something in the forum is a link. If it's blue, it's such a dark blue that it's nearly indistinguishable from black. I've noticed that the url tag is not terribly popular here, but when it does get used, the author should be rewarded for the effort by having his or her text jump out as featuring a link.
THAT IS ALL.
But my suggestion is that anchors get bolded or have some kind of text-decoration. At least to my eyes, it's now difficult to see when something in the forum is a link. If it's blue, it's such a dark blue that it's nearly indistinguishable from black. I've noticed that the url tag is not terribly popular here, but when it does get used, the author should be rewarded for the effort by having his or her text jump out as featuring a link.
THAT IS ALL.
spooky said:
Just a shame about the members
Eff. I should've shut up.Case said:
a:visited is what I had in mind, but it makes sense to obscure that a bit. If you've clicked on a link, etc., etc.
[edit]Jesus. a:visited within the content div. It might be useful to note (even visited) links in the bodies of posts. The rest of the visited links on the forum in the navbars, etc., us addicts already know are links. I might forget that a strip of text in a post is a link I already clicked on.[/edit]
[edit]I may be too tired to be fully coherent right now.[/edit]
I was worried that anchors called by the url tag were in some different class where they were always not underlined and dark blue. Nevermind.
The comment about whitespace is that, though I'm generally against it, here it seems to work ok. In Gmail, it is an unmitigated disaster.
One of these days Case is going to go postal on all our arses.
I changed visited links to be light blue earlier, I noticed they were dark. You've probably just still got the old css cached.
There looks like a lot of whitespace without the dark background the old forum had but the main content is the same width.
I increased the font size and line-height because I prefer websites with a larger font. I think they're easier to read but that's only my opinion.
There looks like a lot of whitespace without the dark background the old forum had but the main content is the same width.
I increased the font size and line-height because I prefer websites with a larger font. I think they're easier to read but that's only my opinion.
No, that is definitely the case that it's easier to read open text (though maybe a less condensed font would work; I don't care). The problem a big line-height doesn't work in gmail is since one doesn't use gmail to hang out and read a complicated treatise over the course of an hour. One needs all their emails, quickly, accessibly, etc. If there are only 10 lines in my inbox before it scrolls, there is some fucked up design going on.Case said:
That logic, imo, would carry over to this medium, but for some reason it works. I don't get exasperated with scrolling like I do with my inbox.
