Looks good. This was really needed IMO. The current site, while perfectly functional, is just ugly and keeping it fresh might help a little with PHP's recent reputation with being quite uncool, because, lets face it, sometimes looks are important.
The biggest thing php.net needs is moderation on the comments. There are some 10+ year old comments that are just wrong now. Cleaning that up and moderating a comment before it is posted would be great.
NOT SURE.<p>I visit PHP.net around 20 times a day according to my stats. It's the single most efficient website I know for getting what I need, fast. I do not need more white space on that site. It would not improve my user experience.
Looks a lot less dated than the other one so good job on that front.<p>Not sure if anyone working on the design / copy is reading this, but I'm wondering why they felt compelled to add "popular" to "PHP is a popular general-purpose scripting language [...]".<p>Should people use or be interested in PHP because it's popular? How is this a differentiating feature worth mentioning in the first sentence introducing PHP? (Genuine question, I'm not saying it's wrong for them to call it so)<p>Also, titling a section "PECL + PEAR" is useless if you don't already know what they are. Why not call it "Extensions & Libraries" or something similarly descriptive and let the acronyms be introduced in the description?
I quite like it. I don't think it's too bad as a standalone site but compared the previous one, it's <i>amazing</i>.<p>I do like the documentation menu. Similar to the way Codeigniter does it.
I think it looks great.<p>My only comment is: put the class synopses (?) in a fixed width font (like they are. In the detail section). It looks odd this way.<p>+1 for being completely usable on my iPad and not breaking the back button while all still being quite snappy.<p>FWIW I have no issue with the green. Good work, guys.
I recall using this design a year or so ago.. and I was really hoping they'd change some things about it (mainly the ugly green everywhere..) Unfortunately that's not the case.. Functionally the site is better than the current design though!.. Right?
Wrong redesign IMHO. It's kinda like the new Google thing, better aesthetic proportions , whitespace and shit.. but loss in density and habits. I'd vote for something less bold and more derivative and small step and :loop:
The Wayback machine shows me that the current design is nearly 11 years old.<p><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20010401091809/http://php.net/" rel="nofollow">http://web.archive.org/web/20010401091809/http://php.net/</a>
It's been around for ages already - for those who stumble on to the settings part of the site. It takes some time to get use to, but overall I like that they have gone from 90's to 20's era.
Should've hired an actual UX and/or Interactive Designer to do the redesign and not leave it in the hands of us developers (again). Hope there are further improvements!
My thoughts:<p>* The animation (click 'Documentation') is too slow. As likely the most visited link, this needs to be instantaneous.<p>* The top bar takes too much vertical space.
I really like the new design, but as a PHP developer now using Python... the boat has sailed on making the language better, and more appealing with better designed sites.<p><?=exit(1);?>