From: Luben Tuikov <ltuikov@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:46:50 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gitweb: tree view: eliminate redundant "blob"
Message-ID: <20061002194650.12839.qmail@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vd59b27c4.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

--- Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:
> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > ... That means that we cannot distinguish really well (at 
> > least color) between tree and blob entries.
> 
> Do we even say links are blue and underlined by forcing that in
> our css?
> 
> Doesn't leading drwxr-xr-x mean anything?
> 
> Why is making the distinction important in the first place?
> 
> > In the case of shortlog/log/history/heads/tags view, to clearly mark 
> > subject/title of a commit or tag as link, we would have to use default 
> > link decoration....
> > But underlined text is harder to read, and blue underlined text even 
> > more so...
> 
> This is something in which I can see some more sense than tree
> vs blob issue, but only as a principle issue.  In practice, the
> list of commit subjects is the first thing users encounter, and
> as long as there is some visual indication (e.g. mousing over it
> makes it obvious it is something that is clickable), I think
> users will quickly pick up that it will lead to the commit's
> detail.

Very well put.

   Luben