You'll learn more from watching someone use the site than you can learn from me. Here's a good exercise:
1. Write down the top 5 goals that someone coming to the site might want to reach. For example, "Find out what Io is" is probably #1, "See what the syntax looks like" is probably another, and "Learn the benefits over other languages" is probably a third. You'd be able to come up with a better list than me by looking at your analytics (what pages people visit most).
2. Write these goals down. Then ask someone who has never seen the site before to accomplish them right in front of you. Don't explain anything and don't interact with them until they're done. Make sure you keep a timer to see how long it takes.
3. After they're done, ask them what they found clear, what they found confusing, and what else they might want to see on the site.
Edit: Rust's website has an open-source license[3]. You can copy the code and use it directly! That's great news because they host it on S3 with Jekyll, which is ridiculously inexpensive.
I'm not an expert or a designer. Your users will show you how to improve the design because you'll see evidence of where they're getting tripped up. For example, if a certain page is the last one most people see before leaving the site (other than front page), then you can tell that page A) solves a problem, or B) causes people to lose interest.
A good starting point is to look at other language sites and decide which ones seem friendliest and least friction-y. How easy it is to get started?
As examples, I really like Rust's website[1], and Elm[2] is pretty good, too. Rust's site is great because it's readable, all the important stuff is above the fold, and it has big action buttons. They also give a fairly long example of syntax, which is important.
I've even seen some languages that will show a snippet of code in an existing, comparable language, along with that same snippet translated into the new language. That's a great way to make your language accessible.
No no no ... don't lift another project's website directly, it's tacky and will make your project look second-rate.
Why do you insist on dominating the thread like this anyway? For my money, "reply to every replier" users are in a dead heat with "horse sense theory" users (like the one at the top of the HIV thread earlier, always followed w/ reams of "aw shucks, thanks!" replies) as the top nuisance on HN.
> No no no ... don't lift another project's website directly, it's tacky and will make your project look second-rate.
It's easy to change the look and feel drastically with CSS, while keeping the file structure and HTML layout. It's not any different than downloading or using a website template, which is itself not much different from using a library in any programming language. Standing on the shoulders of giants is a core value of software.
> Why do you insist on dominating the thread like this anyway?
I only mostly replied to people who were in my own comment thread. That's called a conversation.
If I've inserted myself into anything unnecessarily, it's because usability and accessibility are really important to me. I want languages like this to succeed on their merits, rather than suffering due to unfriendly design. Plus I have friends and relatives with visual impairments.
But that's the thing! Caring about usability isn't enough. Are you a domain expert? Have you read your Jakob Nielsen and such?
Because Nielsen, for instance, probably wouldn't slam this design as hard as you have: For a work in progress, it's pretty danged good. The homepage is obvious, it presents the most important things in a way that nobody could miss. I'll grant that the "binaries" link is a bit obscure, but that's copy. There's some wasted space on the homepage but that's not a huge deal because the website's simplicity puts most things only a click or two away. The "packages" page is great! The tutorial could use a monospace font, but otherwise is great too.
I really hope that your advice doesn't result in iolanguage.org becoming a clone of Rust's website or otherwise an impersonator. The authors here are trying something new and unique and what they've pulled off is already looking sharp and easy-to-use.
So yea, I think you're just trying to sound like an expert. Trust me, you're not the only person here who knows about usability (if you do, that is -- you come off as more of a frontend developer than a real UX person, because your suggestions are lacking in depth and experience, and the HTML/CSS bit in your reply makes you sound especially green).
Just look at that landing page: logo, menu, intro, download buttons, code example (and editor), features - all 'above the fold' (on my screen).
Sure, everything's there, but from a design perspective, there's no real focus on any one component. Sometimes that focus is actually the design intention. In that sense, the Io website hits it perfectly.
The Rust website absolutely has a focus: the single-sentence description in an enormous font, directly adjacent to the enormous and obvious "Install" action button.
Other than that, the page contains nothing other than the code example (a 100% must for any language homepage), the documentation links (a 150,000% must for any language homepage), and the short feature summary that supports the focus sentence.
I like the new design. I hadn't realized I had visited Io before. I found the new site like a pamphlet - easy to hit a menu item, simple, clean design. I find some other language websites too technical or crowded. This drew me (back) in, and I found it easy to answer all of the typical questions I have when checking out a programming language page. I'll give Io a try now!
1. Write down the top 5 goals that someone coming to the site might want to reach. For example, "Find out what Io is" is probably #1, "See what the syntax looks like" is probably another, and "Learn the benefits over other languages" is probably a third. You'd be able to come up with a better list than me by looking at your analytics (what pages people visit most).
2. Write these goals down. Then ask someone who has never seen the site before to accomplish them right in front of you. Don't explain anything and don't interact with them until they're done. Make sure you keep a timer to see how long it takes.
3. After they're done, ask them what they found clear, what they found confusing, and what else they might want to see on the site.