12 Dec 2002 | JF said...

37svn.com should be working shortly. Hopefully early next week. Please stay tuned.

12 Dec 2002 | heif said...

very nice!

12 Dec 2002 | SU said...

For those of you who are wondering why we went through all this trouble only fail validation... We're tracking down the offending code and will purge it as soon as we can. First things first!

12 Dec 2002 | paul said...

looks good on ie6, winxp and ie5.2 on osX, good job guys. nice and plain, the way i likes it.

you guys use green and light grey tho, you're obviously ripping my site off, hehe.

12 Dec 2002 | heif said...

37.meetup.com

12 Dec 2002 | brad said...

cool

12 Dec 2002 | Don Schenck said...

Love it. Love it!. Great job, as usual. Damn I wish I had that kind of talent. I'm gonna drink some Pinot Noir, eat lobster and smoke a CAO to toast you guys this weekend.

Cheers!

12 Dec 2002 | Brian B said...

wow, this is a fantastic redesign, I am in love with it. I wasn't aware that movabletype was in PHP though, or is it not, and you guys are just making it spit out .php pages?

12 Dec 2002 | SU said...

Forgot to thank Jason Kottke for the javascript error-checking and cookie-management in the comment area.

12 Dec 2002 | SU said...

I wasn't aware that movabletype was in PHP though, or is it not, and you guys are just making it spit out .php pages?

We're using some PHP scripts here and there, so we needed all pages to have that extension (or change our .htaccess preferences). MT can spit out files with just about any extension -- it's a preference in the admin.

12 Dec 2002 | jeremy said...

ahhhhh. so nice. congrats on a lovely redesign (god, it's sooooo clean!).

12 Dec 2002 | JF said...

re: 37.meetup.com

I have no clue who adz008 is. You'll understand if you check out the page. Scary.

12 Dec 2002 | ek said...

It's okay JF, we all know about Sean, no need to be ashamed of your wild chess/sex dalliances.

13 Dec 2002 | alisha said...

great job! I like the new "most popular posts" feature. and CONGRATULATIONS for moving to moveable type! :-)
...oh, just noticed...I like the preview feature as well.

13 Dec 2002 | sherlock_yoda said...

I don't know why, but everything is strangely right-aligned in my browser (IE 5). Is this a design feature or something odd happening. If it is part of the design, I can't say I like it much...sowwy

Sherlock

13 Dec 2002 | asd said...

Great redesign! Readable and usable :-)

13 Dec 2002 | Jesper said...

Yay. Best svn ever.

13 Dec 2002 | coudal said...

yep yep yep yep. very nice fellows.

13 Dec 2002 | Paul said...

It's Movable Type, not Moveable. Look at the logo at the bottom of this page.

Easy fix.

The redesign is nice, very much in line with your aesthetic.

13 Dec 2002 | dmr said...

Horray for the 'remember me' checkbox! I think I liked the comments against a white ground tho. No hard feelings.

Why MT rather than a homegrown solutions guys?

13 Dec 2002 | Jesper said...

Oh, by the way, it's Movable Type, not Moveable Type.

BTW:
"To make something italic:
Text to bold

To make a hyperlink:
Text to bold" (my emphasis)

13 Dec 2002 | Jesper said...

Corrected version:

Oh, by the way, it's Movable Type, not Moveable Type.

BTW:
"To make something italic:
<em>Text to bold</em>

To make a hyperlink:
<a href="URL">Text to bold</a>" (my emphasis)

13 Dec 2002 | Martin Conaghan said...

Looks good guys.

I'd be interested to know how (if) you converted your archives.

I currently use Blogger Pro, and whilst I really like it, I also like the MT setup too. The only thing I'd have problems with is converting my archives (over a year's worth).

Anyone got any ideas? If so, visit www.copydesk.co.uk and drop me an email.

13 Dec 2002 | JF said...

We didn't convert our archives. We want to start fresh every year.

13 Dec 2002 | JF said...

BTW, big ups to SU -- the man in charge of the redesign.

13 Dec 2002 | fajalar said...

I did like the 'open external links in a new browser' function. And the gray on gray is harder to read than the gray on white. But we are not reading for performance here!

Overall, well done!

13 Dec 2002 | SU said...

Jesper, the textual mistakes you pointed out have been fixed. Thanks for catching those.

13 Dec 2002 | alisha said...

i liked it when you could see which posts had new comments by making the number black and bold - that seems to be gone.

13 Dec 2002 | SU said...

Alisha,

i liked it when you could see which posts had new comments by making the number black and bold - that seems to be gone.

The number didn't differentially change from normal to bold before -- it just looked like an unvisited link (which was black instead of gray). It should look the same here now since we applied the same number trick to the comments link. I'm seeing it on my Mac, but it may be slightly tweaked on a PC.

13 Dec 2002 | SU said...

And thanks to a few tips from Zeldman, we're rolling with the big dogs on the XHTML validation train. We'll make it to XHTML Strict someday, but this will do for now.

13 Dec 2002 | JF said...

The number didn't differentially change from normal to bold before -- it just looked like an unvisited link (which was black instead of gray).

The difference was the bold type -- it made it easier to detect the color change. We'll look into making it more obvious.

13 Dec 2002 | john said...

Oh, by the way, it's Movable Type, not Moveable Type.

Well I'll be - it is! I never noticed that since I've always gone to www.moveabletype.org with no problems. Good thinking of them to get both.

13 Dec 2002 | tomas said...

Nice work! My only suggestion: it'd be cool if the descriptions in your XML/RDF file contained the entire body of the post instead of just a summary. Unless you explicitly don't want to make SVN readable in a format not designed by you...

13 Dec 2002 | fajalar said...

Strange...

When I click the forward button to come back from the TOC to this topic (and other topics too) all fields and images load but the text does not appear.

If I "select all" then it does appear. Probably just me.

13 Dec 2002 | Mart said...

the grey type on a grey background is bad. If you're set on a grey background then please make the text black

13 Dec 2002 | Jesper said...

Oh, by the way, it's Movable Type, not Moveable Type.

Well I'll be - it is! I never noticed that since I've always gone to www.moveabletype.org with no problems. Good thinking of them to get both.

They registered it on purpose because they know that since both spellings are correct ones, but their software is named only one of them (thankfully), people are bound to get the wrong one. This is good contingency design. Check out the news archives on their homepage; If I recall correctly, they registered the extra domain quite early.

13 Dec 2002 | Jesper said...

Jesper, the textual mistakes you pointed out have been fixed. Thanks for catching those.

Hey, no problem.

While I've got your ears, I agree with people that say you should change the comments box a little; you should change the comments box to a lighter grey (#f5f5f5 will do fine) or add a border around the comments box and changing the background to white, or perhaps something in the middle. What you SHOULD do in any case is to darken the text color from #666 (#666 on a site redesigned on friday the 13th... *shudder*) to around #444 to improve readability.

13 Dec 2002 | SU said...

When I click the forward button to come back from the TOC to this topic (and other topics too) all fields and images load but the text does not appear.

What browser/OS combo are you running? We were seeing that in testing, but I can't replicate it on my particular machine (either OSX/IE5/Chimera or Win2K/IE6).

13 Dec 2002 | SU said...

the grey type on a grey background is bad. If you're set on a grey background then please make the text black.

Not black, but dark gray now. We wanted to preserve the black links for similarity between 37signals.com and SVN. Should be more legible now.

13 Dec 2002 | SU said...

While I've got your ears, I agree with people that say you should change the comments box a little; you should change the comments box to a lighter grey (#f5f5f5 will do fine) or add a border around the comments box and changing the background to white, or perhaps something in the middle.

Well, we can't make the site suit everyone's taste (without providing alternate stylesheets, I imagine)... Let's see how the darker gray text treats everyone's eyes for now.

13 Dec 2002 | SU said...

liked it when you could see which posts had new comments by making the number black and bold - that seems to be gone.

Update: We've changed the style on the homepage post counts so that unvisited links are now bold, visited links normal. That should help.

13 Dec 2002 | Jesper said...

#333 now. Excellent. Great. Swell. And 37svn.com works now. For me anyway, your DNS's mileage may vary.

13 Dec 2002 | fajalar said...

Update: We've changed the style on the homepage post counts so that unvisited links are now bold, visited links normal. That should help.

Yup, helps a lot. Thanks. And the text is much, much easier to read.

13 Dec 2002 | Joshua Kaufman said...

The fonts are still sized with pixels? How very disappointing. There are plenty of excellent examples on how to use relative font sizes, most notably from Mark Pilgrim. I also wrote up a short story on font sizing on my site some time ago.

13 Dec 2002 | SU said...

Joshua, thanks for the links regarding font sizing... I'll look into it. One issue with Mark's approach is that we get the pleasure of adding even more hacks in our CSS documents to support Microsoft's lack of consistent standards support. It's not a problem, per se, but it's yet another concession to poor CSS implementations.

14 Dec 2002 | JB said...

A breadth of fresh air.
I have to refresh to see the comment_icon.gif image.

Besides that when the image shows it leaves gaps.

IE6.0 SP1 (Latest updates applied)

In other browsers
Mozilla 1.21 = Okay
Opera 6.05 = Okay
Opera 7.0 B 2349 = Okay
Netscape 7.01 = Okay

Would you require one for NN 4.08?

14 Dec 2002 | Timo said...

Interesting to see more and more sites using right hand navigation; feels more intuitive doesn't it? At least to right handed people...

14 Dec 2002 | Eric said...

(in the comments...)

Why is it that the date/time is given greater prominence than the author's name? That date stamp is huge and not really more important than who is saying what.

14 Dec 2002 | Eric said...

I also notice that non-linked author names are bold, same as the "said...", but the linked ones are not bold. Not really what you wanted, nu?

14 Dec 2002 | SU said...

Interesting to see more and more sites using right hand navigation; feels more intuitive doesn't it? At least to right handed people...

I've always thought it more intuitive, too. Particularly on sites where the content is the star of the show.

15 Dec 2002 | James said...

BUG: The remember me label often disapears in IE 6 /win2k for me. Anyone else seeing this? I believe I read about this odd bug somewhere but can't recall...

15 Dec 2002 | James said...

BUG: The remember me label often disapears in IE 6 /win2k for me. Anyone else seeing this? I believe I read about this odd bug somewhere but can't recall...

15 Dec 2002 | ~bc said...

Well, here's the pisser, now I look like a fraud. I've been working on my (and my friend's) blog for months now, (we're slow, and building our own backend in PHP) and this totally matches our color scheme. Take a look, recently.rainweb.net, it's creepy.

15 Dec 2002 | ~bc said...

oh yeah, it's not done yet, still, either

16 Dec 2002 | alisha said...

i hate to be a bite-in-the-ass, but could we have the "jump to the bottom" feature back too?

did I mention that i like the new logo? it vibes very well with the 37 logo.

16 Dec 2002 | Joshua Kaufman said...

One issue with Mark's approach is that we get the pleasure of adding even more hacks in our CSS documents to support Microsoft's lack of consistent standards support.

I understand your apprehension to using CSS hacks. Personally, I avoid them at all costs. I was pointing out Mark's solution because it's generally one of the more powerful methods for achieving cross-browser accessibility. If you want to stay away from hacks, I recommend using percentages as the base font size and then use ems for sizing everything else. Something between 85% and 100% usually works well although most designers shriek at the thought of using a font size of 100%.

16 Dec 2002 | Joshua Kaufman said...

Woops, I tried to use tags to italicize the first paragraph in the comment above, and it didn't seem work. My apologies. The first paragraph is a quote from SU.

16 Dec 2002 | SU said...

Woops, I tried to use tags to italicize the first paragraph in the comment above, and it didn't seem work. My apologies. The first paragraph is a quote from SU.

Like the key below says, use "em" tags instead of the old "i" -- the XHTML validator will thank you.

16 Dec 2002 | SU said...

i hate to be a bite-in-the-ass, but could we have the "jump to the bottom" feature back too?

I'm starting to miss that myself (despite the fact that the "Post a Comment" link drops you down to the bottom). I'll see what I can do.

16 Dec 2002 | fajalar said...

When I click the forward button to come back from the TOC to this topic (and other topics too) all fields and images load but the text does not appear.

What browser/OS combo are you running? We were seeing that in testing, but I can't replicate it on my particular machine (either OSX/IE5/Chimera or Win2K/IE6).

I am on IE 6.0.2600.000CO running on a Windows NT 4.0. The caveat here is that this version of IE is something MS customized for my company. So that may be the problem. But I have had a similar problem at home (Mac OSX 10.2.2, IE 5.2.something) where I have to select all to see stuff on the screen. And it seems to happen when I move the mouse while the page is loading, but not always.

Anyway, it's probably a small (very) problem. I was just reporting it.

16 Dec 2002 | alisha said...

"despite the fact that the "Post a Comment" link drops you down to the bottom"

oh, ok, then its fine. I didnt notice that.

20 Dec 2002 | Antonio Cavedoni said...

Did you guys know that all the main table is completely right aligned in Explorer 5 for Windows? You should probably check it out (and fix it, hopefully). Cheers from Bristol!

26 Dec 2002 | SU said...

Did you guys know that all the main table is completely right aligned in Explorer 5 for Windows? You should probably check it out (and fix it, hopefully). Cheers from Bristol!

All fixed now. Sorry about that.

08 Jan 2003 | malross said...

There are so many things that are excellent about the new design that it seems peevish to mention the one thing I don't like, but mention it I will. :) Dotted underlines for hyperlinks - what's all that about?

Just when the web (well, a number of sites I visit anyway :) seemed to be establishing the de facto standard of 'dotted underline means this text has an explanatory tooltip', everyone seems to have hijacked the effect for full links.

As much as I try to avoid sounding like Jakob Nielsen, links always worked perfectly well with a proper underline, one of the web's first and probably best known standards. The dotted underline for extra information without a link was a really nice and logical extension of this. Not-quite-a-full-underline equated to not-quite-a-full-link-but-more-info-nonetheless. I think it's a real shame that a potentially powerful new tool like this is being lost before it's really taken hold.

Okay, pet peeve blurted and over. :)

All the other changes - excellent. :) Favourite bits:
1. the Preview feature
2. the elegance of the new style/layout/logo
3. syndication - yay!

08 Apr 2003 | tea said...

test

27 Nov 2003 | David said...

Very interesting post

17 Jan 2004 | Gregory said...

For example, if you see an AIM window peeking out from behind your browser and you click on it, that window will come to the front, but the main application window will not. The Mail.app/Activity Viewer is another example. The Aqua system of layers works well in many instances, but not in all. Thank goodness that the Dock is always there to come to the rescue. I know that clicking on an application icon in the Dock will always result in not only the application coming to the front, but also any non-minimized windows associated with it. And if the application is active but no windows are open, clicking on the Dock icon should create a new window in that application.