The results of the header design tweaks have been announced. The winner, and the strong second place finisher, were the designs that went beyond the brief and created a different look for the menu. To give these designs more time for consideration they won’t be implemented in 2.8, but will be tabled for 2.9.
My general feeling about this is that the ‘winning’ designs went beyond the brief. Instead of just addressing the problem they introduced stylistic changes that were unnecessary to accomplish the goal. I don’t know the motives for doing that, whether they are styles that were previously declined, were alternative designs that hadn’t been presented before or were new designs and they got a bit carried away, but I have to question the result of the poll when people are voting for designs that stick strictly to the brief, versus designs with extra eye-candy that overpower the solution the poll was intended to address.
Am I being too harsh?
(__)
`
I agree about the end result. I think what they should have done, setting aside format issues, is to have moved the menu up and defined a space within which the header would need to sit. All suggestions should have been limited to that space.
Of course I could be wrong, perhaps updated menus was something they were willing to consider, but it doesn’t seem that way to me.
(__)
`
I don’t think so. Even Jane Wells in her post raised a number of questions/issues related to the results of the poll. You’ve raised a few more. Obviously, this poll didn’t go exactly as planned and I think the end result will probably be a few touchups to the current implementation versus anything else.