Christianity's updated site theme is ready for testing!

Question

As part of implementing the new unified themes across the network, we're gradually rolling out updated site themes for each site. As of today, we have enabled your updated site theme for testing.

If you can't see it right now, that's by design! We're hoping to get feedback from you before rolling it out to everyone permanently. If you'd like to review it, here's how:

How do I enable it?

Click here and check the "Beta test new themes" option. This will turn on the new theme for all sites that have one in testing, including this one. Here's more info on how to opt in. You can uncheck the box to revert to the older theme until the site is live for everyone (note, it will take a few minutes to go into effect).

What type of feedback do we need?

On this post: Bugs related to this site's design elements

Please help us look for issues/bugs related to the theme design and how we have mapped the old theme to the new. This needs to be done within the limits of the new unified theme.

On Meta Stack Exchange: General concerns about left nav or theming

If you have concerns or issues regarding the left nav or the overall approach we are taking to theming, then this Meta Stack Exchange post is the right place for feedback.

As you may notice, there are some unique design elements like voting arrows and tags that are being standardized in this process. Keeping these custom elements makes our ability to maintain the sites too complex and, while we're very sad to see them go, we're in a difficult position of needing to make the site designs work together so that we can continue to address feature requests and bugs that will make your Q&A experience better. This is addressed in a Meta Stack Exchange post if you want more detail.

What new themes?

If you're like, "What the heck are you talking about?", then you should read the Meta Stack Exchange post entitled Rollout of new network site themes (and maybe the posts it links to for the full background).

Thanks so much for your constructive feedback!

Answer 1

status-completed

Georgia was supposed to be a font that worked with these various typefaces well. It's proving to be less than we'd hoped. We're looking at solutions.

Something is very wrong with Greek accents:

How it should look:

And to confirm that post didn't have some weird non-standard way of encoding Greek in Unicode, here's a sentence I copied out of Accordance just then:

1Tim. 2:8 Βούλομαι οὖν προσεύχεσθαι τοὺς ἄνδρας ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ἐπαίροντας ὁσίους χεῖρας χωρὶς ὀργῆς καὶ διαλογισμοῦ.

Answer 2

status-review

Underlining links with Hebrew is not good:

Answer 3

status-completed

We're looking into a deeper shade and will keep in mind making it distinct from visited link colors.

Overall I'm pretty pleased with how this has come together! So far my one (minor) complaint is:

The standard link color seems too light / bright.

Here's our home page:

Links that have been clicked do get a bit darker, as that screenshot shows – I'd love to see that darker shade be the standard color, and then something slightly darker yet be the clicked link color.

The problem is most obvious when the color is lightened further, such as on the Prvileges page:

Can we make this more readable?

Answer 4

status-completed

This has been fixed everywhere. There's a weird bug when the images are created causing the alignment to be off... we're trying to figure out what's causing it so we can get it fixed. ~Catija

The baseline for the logo isn't perfectly aligned (see the N):

Like ELU for some reason it's noticably worse on Meta, though it's still a slight issue for the main site logo.

Answer 5

status-completed

Comments will be switched to use a serif font, the way they were.

Having sans serif comments makes the Hebrew hard to read (example from here):

Unlike those at Mi Yodeya, I think it's very likely that the majority of Hebrew reading users of this site are not very familiar with sans serif Hebrew fonts.

The text is also quite small and not well hinted. (Though to be fair, its still small in the old theme.)

We have suggested some fonts previously. I still like Cardo but I haven't tried Crimson Text.

Answer 6

Badges are a little cramped and off vertical center.

Old theme:

New theme:

Answer 7

Logo on meta in wrong font

On Meta, the meta part of the logo is in the wrong typeface and at the wrong weight. It no longer corresponds to the Christianity part.

Here’s the original:

And here’s the new version:

Both are using Caslon for the small caps, but only the original continues to use Caslon for the “meta” part, which is using the semibold font in that typeface.

But the new version switches horses mid-race and suddenly dives into Times. It also changes the weighting to a full bold from the original semibold.

This looks quite inauthentic in many ways, just one of which is the mismatch of the small cap ᴛ in Christianity and the lowercase t in the new meta. Those don’t go together. The serifs are wrong on the Times version: look at the one at the top left of the m in meta: it just does not go with Caslon.

Answer 8

status-completed

Misaligned baseline on answers

When there’s an answer, the entire new heavyweight box is on the wrong baseline. Here’s how it used to look:

And here’s how it looks now:

Both the 5 score and the word answers in the middle section are now on a misaligned baseline compared with the votes and views to either side of it.

Answer 9

status-bydesign

The red link in the text box at the top of the screen used to make sense when we had lots of reddish links:

But now I think it's the only red link on the main site:

Is this intentional? It seems like it should be consistent with other links.