Redesign of dlang.org

[Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d]

Let me preface this saying I'm mildly on the just-keep-ddoc side 
of things....

On Tuesday, 22 December 2015 at 14:42:35 UTC, Jack Stouffer wrote:
> it's not in ddoc? Not everyone knows HTML.

If you don't know HTML, the ddoc macros the dlang.org site uses 
will be pretty mysterious too. What is $(SPANC)? or $(DIVID), 
without referring to html?

> Secondly, all of the existing content will have to be converted.

Oh, that's trivial! dmd -D literally does that automatically.

> And finally, what will we do about PDF, epub, and LaTeX 
> generation if everything is in HTML?

That's similarly extremely easy, actually IMO quite a bit easier 
than messing with the ddoc macros, because HTML is a very easy 
language to parse and transform, especially if written 
semantically.

> If you wish to go with another format like Markdown, we get to 
> the problems I listed here:

I agree, markdown is gross.


> But the logo is a rather small part of the overall design. 
> Plus, there is the problem of brand recognition. Changing the 
> logo is not a small event in the grand scheme of things.

The new logo design still struck me as the same brand when I 
first saw it.