PF Style 2026

[PeterDonis]

Not sure the question, but the two styles are distinct template sets.

By "template sets" you mean the actual back end code (in PHP?) that determines the page layout, not just the CSS stylesheets, correct?

Whereas, by contrast, I suspect that light mode vs. dark mode is just a CSS stylesheet change, no change to anything else, correct?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

By "template sets" you mean the actual back end code (in PHP?) that determines the page layout, not just the CSS stylesheets, correct?

Whereas, by contrast, I suspect that light mode vs. dark mode is just a CSS stylesheet change, no change to anything else, correct?

PHP code is shared across styles and the system. The templates are rendered by the PHP. Yes the modes are essentially stylesheets.

 

[PeterDonis]

The templates are rendered by the PHP. Yes the modes are essentially stylesheets.

Would it be possible to have "legacy" light and dark mode stylesheets that just had the colors and fonts from the old style light and dark modes, but were rendered with the new templates (so would have the new layout)?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Would it be possible

Anything is possible, but out of box, not possible to have multiple mode versions

 

[PeterDonis]

not possible to have multiple mode versions

I don't necessarily mean multiple mode versions, just more than two modes. Is two modes hard-coded somewhere, or could there be more? They would just need to be named appropriately.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I don't necessarily mean multiple mode versions, just more than two modes. Is two modes hard-coded somewhere, or could there be more? They would just need to be named appropriately.

Given how it's all structured in the backend, it's not straightforward. No worries, the old style can stay.

 

[CrysPhys]

I strongly prefer comfortably able to view and to not need to scroll so much to find where the forum parts are. That is why I like the previous style.

After you login, on the new home page, there is a "Browse the forums" button. On the left-hand screen shot, the white cursor arrow is pointing to this button, which is located after the intro, but before all the new discussions stuff that you want to bypass. If you click on this button, you will be taken directly to the forums listings (right-hand screen shot).

@Greg Bernhardt . I guess the next request would be, "Is it easy to add this bypass function to the home page prior to login?" Thanks.

 

[PeterDonis]

Given how it's all structured in the backend, it's not straightforward.

Understood, no pressure.

That said, I have some experience with PHP and CSS, and decoupling styling (fonts/colors/etc.) from page layout is good practice. At some point if I have the free time available, would I be able to browse the source code and see if I might be able to contribute something along these lines?

No worries, the old style can stay.

Thanks!

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

That said, I have some experience with PHP and CSS, and decoupling styling (fonts/colors/etc.) from page layout is good practice. At some point if I have the free time available, would I be able to browse the source code and see if I might be able to contribute something along these lines?

I wonder if there is a chrome extension that allows you to customize and remember a stylesheet for a site.

 

[PeterDonis]

I wonder if there is a chrome extension that allows you to customize and remember a stylesheet for a site.

I don't use Chrome, I use Firefox.

I believe there are Firefox extensions that allow you to do this, but I haven't looked into it in detail.

 

[symbolipoint]

ChrysPhys #217
The images you included do not get big enough to see, but some time soon I will change to 2026 Style and try to look for what you described.

 

[symbolipoint]

OKAY ChrysPhys, for post #217.
I took a look. Nice, not so bad, for regular forum members and frequent visitors, but I would finely guess that newcomers seeing Style 2026 for the first time do not think to look for a button linking for "Browse the Forum". They want to know what the forum looks like and begin browsing without looking for any jazzy tricks.

 

[CrysPhys]

PF style 2026 has been released. It's a warmer, more modern and academic theme.

For now, we're not standing on our own very well. Chat search has greatly harmed participation, so we must make it very clear what our differentiation is and value prop.

Some sites (such as Facebook, TikTok, LinkedIn, ...) can determine which population the bulk of their users fall into and tailor their sites to this population. Forums such as PF, however, face an inherent dilemma: they need to satisfy two distinct and disparate populations of users. The first population (POP 1) comprises users who seek help; the second population (POP 2) comprises users who provide help. Excluding outliers, POP 1 typically will comprise younger users, and POP 2 typically will comprise older (including substantially older) users.

Age per se will not be the sole dispositive factor deciding preferences in overall website characteristics. But age will be a strong component in factors that do determine such preferences. E.g., age affects visual acuity and experiential expectations (such as, those who seek change as an end in itself vs. those who value consistency and reliability; those who enjoy jazzy vibrancy vs. those who prioritize functionality; those who like to browse through random posts in the hope of serendipitously finding buried treasure vs. those who want to get down to business pronto ....).

I don't think compromise solutions will work in this instance. Hence, the need for user-configurable options where reasonably feasible.

 

[CrysPhys]

OKAY ChrysPhys, for post #217.
I took a look. Nice, not so bad, for regular forum members and frequent visitors, but I would finely guess that newcomers seeing Style 2026 for the first time do not think to look for a button linking for "Browse the Forum". They want to know what the forum looks like and begin browsing without looking for any jazzy tricks.

We now need to consider the new website in its entirety, not just the "Forums" section. What's important is that the website be partitioned such that individual users can efficiently access the portions that are of interest to them without forcing them to wade through substantial portions that are not of interest to them. For existing members who know what is, and what is not, of interest to them, Greg has now provided suitable mechanisms.

New users, on the other hand, obviously do not yet know what portions are, and what portions are not, of interest to them. They will need to initially explore the website in its entirety, and then decide what portions are, and what portions are not, of interest to them. They can then utilize the appropriate mechanisms to efficiently access the portions that are of interest to them and bypass the portions that are not of interest to them. Similar to "Skip Intro" and "Skip Recap" options when watching shows on streaming services. Some viewers will find the Intro or Recap useful; others will not (and those viewers won't know until they've tried it). What's important is that they have the option to watch them or skip them.

ETA:

@Greg Bernhardt . Instead of "Browse the forums", I would suggest something along the lines of "Go directly to the forums".

 

[symbolipoint]

@Greg Bernhardt . Instead of "Browse the forums", I would suggest something along the lines of "Go directly to the forums".

Maybe. Or maybe some more efficient wording for that. Newcomer may visit forum once or twice, see "Browse the forum" or "Go directly to the forums" and think to himself, "I thought that was what I could do right now". Who knows? I am guessing at this by my intuition.

We say what we can say, but G.B. will decide. Results will come after that.

 

[CrysPhys]

Maybe. Or maybe some more efficient wording for that. Newcomer may visit forum once or twice, see "Browse the forum" or "Go directly to the forums" and think to himself, "I thought that was what I could do right now". Who knows? I am guessing at this by my intuition.

We say what we can say, but G.B. will decide. Results will come after that.

I'm trying to be polite. An alternative (following the wording in streaming services) would be, "Skip all the garbage". But remember the old maxim, "One man's garbage is another man's treasure" [as proven many times in real life on Antiques Roadshow].

 

[sbrothy]

[...]

Why does PF have to "reinvent itself"? And is that even what's happening? The fundamental purpose of the site isn't changing, is it?

It's the world we live in. People don't care if your play is bad, but if you refuse to play at all people will hate you. One of the rules seems to be that you have to reinvent your brand from time to time, and PF does that. So, PF plays by "the rules" and sometimes reinvent itself. People expect it and there'll be various responses; a lot of them probably negative but at least the "audience" notices.

It's better than letting the site stagnate.

 

[CrysPhys]

@Greg Bernhardt . Instead of "Browse the forums", I would suggest something along the lines of "Go directly to the forums".

@Greg Bernhardt . Here's another suggestion. You can probably get rid of the "Catch up on new posts" and "Browse the forums" tabs altogether. Right now on the Home Page top main tab bar, you already have:

<Physics Forums> <Insights Blog + Menu> <Forums + Menu> <What's New + Menu> ...

If you click on the <Physics Forums> tab, you get the Home Page.

If you click on the <Forums> tab (without opening the Menu), you also get the Home Page; so this is redundant. Why not configure it such that if you click the <Forums> tab, you go directly to "Forums"? That would be logical, as Mr. Spock would say.

Similarly, since you already have a <What's new> tab on the main tab bar, there's no need for an additional <Catch up on new posts>.

There is one minor change you would need to maintain consistency. With one exception I've found so far, the <Physics Forum> tab appears on all pages to allow the user to return to the Home Page. The exception is <Insights Blog> and associated pages. Here there is no <Physics Forum> tab. To return to the Home Page, you need to click on the <Forums> tab. So that would need to be changed. You might also need to reformat the <Physics Forum> tab to more clearly indicate it is a tab. I have a feeling you might not want to do that. Another option is a traditional <Home> tab.

 

[CrysPhys]

People don't care if your play is bad, but if you refuse to play at all people will hate you.

Huh??? You've totally lost me on this one.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Why not configure it such that if you click the <Forums> tab, you go directly to "Forums", which would be logical, as Mr. Spock would say.

I originally tried this and there was an issue when linking to a page fragment. Likely some native bug.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

@CrysPhys nope I think I'm wrong. Fixed.

 

[CrysPhys]

@CrysPhys nope I think I'm wrong. Fixed.

Tried it just now. Works with and without login. Thanks. Mr. Spock applauds you.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Tried it just now. Works with and without login. Thanks. Mr. Spock applauds you.

I remember why I couldn't do it. For some reason it ends up creating duplicate breadcrumbs

 

[PeterDonis]

It's better than letting the site stagnate.

I guess we'll find out, when we see whether these new changes affect traffic, and if so how.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I guess we'll find out, when we see whether these new changes affect traffic, and if so how.

I tell you what. It can't hurt

 

[robphy]

• 

Both "Forums" point to the home page.

I think this should read

• Home > Forums > Physics
  
  where
  • "Home" goes to the home page
  • "Forums" goes to https://www.physicsforums.com/#pf-browse

 

[sbrothy]

Huh??? You've totally lost me on this one.

I admit it was somewhat cryptic, and I'm not sure I can do any better. What I meant was that you can't refuse to "play the game" (I mean the game we're all playing on a day to day basis with our lives, jobs, family friends etc.).

People wont have it and will distrust anyone trying to opt out (like a bum refusing to take a job but still thinking they're entitled to your money).

If you "play the game" though, no matter how bad, people will at least respect you for that.

Did that make it clearer? I fear not, but it's the best I can do.

 

[symbolipoint]

robphy in #236, I cannot find the part of the image which represents what I see at that upper left spot on the forum first page.
edit: NOW I see it. I needed to left click on the right-pointing arrow.

 

[sbrothy]

I was satisfied with the old style, which seemed stronger. The new style seems visually like an old sepia photo in comparison. I don't particularly like it but accept that I might get used to it. However, it also gives an impression of having significantly more blank space around stuff (although I don't know if that is actually true), which to me is bad because it means having less information per screenful, needing more scrolling and only having a smaller window into complex discussions.

I used to run a simple website myself (for the Havant Orchestras, up to mid-2024) for which I wrote everything directly in HTML, PHP and CSS using Notepad. "Web experts" kept telling me that the "modern" look was minimal with a lot of white space, but feedback from users indicated they liked having lots of stuff visible at the same time, minimizing scrolling and links to other pages. But everyone agreed that the look was less important than the fact that it worked; in my case it provided the right information in a way which was easy to find.

I also bet that PF has seperate stylesheets for cell-phones and computers @media screen ....

(Like I dream my site will have.) Right now I'm just so busy with the actual Raman-thingy. I left a PhD thesis with my closest associate but have still to receive an acknowledgement that he read it. In the meantime I'm gonna pull in my brother. His "workbench" is at least as cool as mine while being directed towards fixing cars.

I'm not gonna give him a choice though. He needs something to work with!

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I also bet that PF has seperate stylesheets for cell-phones and computers @media screen ....

Same sheet for all device rules