oh good god! the font the font! my eyes!!!

okay, now that that's out of the way...

i miss the nice, large graphics at the top. they always make me want to refresh to see what might come up next. (btw, where did you pull all of those images from?)

so the links to L's and your journals will be contained under the "journals" link?

personally, i like the layout down to the "browse" heading. well, actually, i don't really like the "active entries" feature. i'd prefer that on another page potentially along with the "author picks" content...

hmm... this redesign business is rather tough, isn't it?

(of course, usually i access Aqoul via the RSS feed)

You're mad. Utterly barking mad.

But I liked the overall look.

btw, where did you pull all of those images from?

Old books with long-expired copyrights. From my personal collection.

so the links to L's and your journals will be contained under the "journals" link?

Yes, but I'm still working out how they will all connect, etc.

hmm... this redesign business is rather tough, isn't it?

It is, but I'm an obsessive perfectionist (aka barking mad). And perhaps looking for ways to increase ad revenue.

dear e,

i do like it ... a LOT.

of course the font for the "aqoul" sign in upper left corner will change, and also the fonts in the entries - i do quite like arial.

the category list in the upper left corner could - MAYBE - get a more orientalising font, ya'nii more ... hmmmm ... handwrite-y?

what does the little green box in each entry header mean/do?

in the upper right corner - does "go" mean "search"? is that an internal aqoul search?

excellent job.

--raf*

I like Georgia as a primary font, but never had the guts to use it until I saw it all over NYT.

As for the banner font, not sure what to use but I would like to maintain that "sinking" effect.

Primary nav should always be readable, can't use a scripty font.

Green box = Technorati search on that entry (who linked to it). A bit useless, so may leave it off.

Finally, top right text field is a search box (internal). Same as current.

You aren't serious about that block thing for the title, right? I really like the font you use - whatever it is - for the Aqoul title on the front page. I especially liked it on the Wafa Sultan translation, where you had it on each page at the bottom, I think? It was seriously impressive.
Beyond that, looks fine.

Might need to note the Google ads on the left are just that, and we are not necessarily endorsing those views.

i.e. to note it more conspicuously.

the font on the top banner thing that says Aqoul looks like it says AOOUL. perhaps a different font or more room below it.

I must agree re the current main title block, the only aspect I don't care for.

Also let me know how the Arabi I sent you works out. I personally like the Kufic script version, which as I recall the first one in the file. The more angular. It would amuse me more if I had access to Maghrebi script, but I can only imagine the howls from the Machreqi heathens.

Not fond of it either, but I'm also tired of the current one.

I wanted to make a "logo" of sorts using the Arabic letters in the background. However, occupied with the structural aspects of the design and haven't got the time. Oh well, next project.

PS - Kufic was very nice, yes.

Re: AOOUL, a totally random comment: "Aoul" is one alternate spelling for the Dagestani term for a mountain village.

Eva,

did you just say Hotdogastan? I hear Yourmomabad is wonderful in the spring.

E: i suppose there's no way to make the page dynamically resize? i'm running at 1600x1200 and, as pretty as the background is, i'd rather see more content. somehow, E, it seems fitting that you're pimping (the automobile definition) out the website.

I could probably implement a dynamic CSS switch.

Later. Maybe.

Well, I was the one who called you barking mad, so I can hardly demand more.

But let's get to some meat.

Playing with the mock up, the following useful commentary:
(i) Not sure if I like the central image block on actual implementation.
(ii) Side bars:
(a) RSS Feeds should have a clearer title for old fools like myself who know little of such things.
(b) Author Picks: wondering if a clearer title would be useful. Perhaps not. Not sure.
(c) Books & Media: Perhaps Media Reviews? Maybe not again.
(d) Upper section selector: wondering if the font should be bolded? Something about it seems too low visibility.

Finally a functional question re the journals: is it possible (or rather is it reasonably practical w/o excessive code bonking, as I know well it is possible) to filter show through to exclude purely perso entries?

Well, in order:

(i) Could be nice, but more work for me (unless I automate, but even then). Thus, I don't like it much either.

(ii)

(a) Should I simply call it "Headlines"?

(b) Suggestions are welcome (but perhaps ignored, depending on my mood)

(c) See (b)

(d) Was bolded before, but made the page seem "heavy" as there is a lot of other bolded text.

Re: filtering...hmm, not sure. Will have to think on it.

In the short term, you're concerned about perso entries showing up on the front page, can simply publish said entry an earlier timestamp (i.e. so it doesn't show up as the latest entry).

The graphics on either side look pretty but don't add much. Keeping a lot of those graphics and adding a column results in a rather thin main colummn. Making the main column broader, even if it means sacrificing the side graphics, would make reading easier.

Also, bigger font.

That's the background. 20% of people are still using 800x600 resolution, so I coded for the lowest common denominator. Your comment is essentially the same as drdougfir's above.

All the fonts are the same size as before. The content font is just no longer Arial.

I believe BSR has a point, although look is important.

Re (ii) generally, I should give more thought to input.

Suppose I could code it for 1024x768 resolution...but I don't want to alienate a large segment of the audience.

yes, don't want to alienate people. how about just have the resolution switching option? I assume the CSS to do that is fairly trivial, although the PHP coding is probably more substantial...

None of it is particularly difficult (can be done with javascript), but I'm not longer inspired/obsessed after...well, I don't want to say how long I worked on this today.

okay then postpone that bit for the next upgrade.

one note of discontent with the rollout... i dislike the font on the main page. difficult for me to read.

Let's see what the masses have to say. Not that Dr. Fir hasn't a voice of course.

Too much coffee this evening.

I changed the font.

Eerie, the summaries are too short (except for the first entry). The way they were was much better, as they could give you a real idea of what's in.