Gentoo Archives: www-redesign

From: Stefan Huszics <sauron@×××××××.se>
To: www-redesign@××××××××××××.org
Subject: [www-redesign] Fontsize, linewidth & what's new underlying layout
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 17:42:56
Message-Id: 41DECA20.3050803@pp.sbbs.se
1 Hi fellow webcoders :)
2
3 First I must apologize for if this has been already brought up, but I
4 have not been able to find any mailarchive for this list. Also, since
5 I'm not familear with CSV, I'm just looking the CSS file from
6 http://www.aaronshi.com/gentoo/ and most recent addition by Curtis, so
7 if some of these things is already changed in CSV I again apologize.
8
9 In any case, when I first visited these pages they where compleatly
10 unreadable to me. The reason for this is that for some strange reason
11 BODY has the highly inapropriate CSS of font-size: small. That means
12 that my correctly set up browser, with a fontsize of comfortable
13 readingsize, is suddenly compleatly ignored/run over by someones random
14 preferance. Why?
15 Who thought is was a good idea to tell me that "hey your are using a too
16 large fontsize, you should use a setting at least 11% smaller then what
17 you currently belive is good for you, no matter what size you are
18 currently using". Isn't this a VERY bad assumption o make?
19
20 Sure, it's easy enough to change the fontsize for me (albeight it might
21 get a bit tiresome to have to do it every time I visit gentoo.org in the
22 future...) but isn't it a lot smarter to start with the assumption that
23 the user actually is happy with his current fontsize and dont need to be
24 force to use smaller fontsize? If someone has their fontsize way too
25 high (or for that matter already way too low) isn't it a lot better to
26 have him/her changes their own preference settings to something that
27 suits them instead of forcing everybody else to have to change fontsize
28 _every_time_ they visit the website?
29
30 In short, can we please respect the visitors whishes and stick with
31 font-size:100% as the dafault for the main content of the site?
32
33
34 Next thing, that also severly lowers readability, is that there seems to
35 be no max-width at all defined for the textual content. Studies show
36 that once text-lines become longer then about 35em or 40em at the most,
37 readability (as in actually understanding what you read) drops like a
38 stone. Thus it is really good practice to make sure people can
39 comfortably read what you write by adding eg max-width:38em on Ps. There
40 is nothing wrong with allowing images/tables/etc to span a lot wider if
41 the user have the screenspace, but plain text should be limited.
42
43 Next reflection, closely related to the above, is that not only is the
44 no max-width, in fact the only forced width seems to be one that makes
45 sure the page is a PIA to read on anything that has less then a 800px
46 wide screen. Are we deliberately trying to piss of people on 640x480res
47 or those trying to visit on eg their handhelds? I know I won't enjoy
48 having a 4 screen wide page to scoll sideways on with my Symbian UIQ
49 smartphone when it could wrap the text just fine at 208px if it was
50 allowed to.
51 Surely we can manage to make a design that is a lot more forgiving in
52 the screenresolutions the visitor has access to and not have to do
53 really stupid things like min-width:770px on body.
54
55 In any case, I have also made a really quick proof of concept for how to
56 get away from the tablemess/abuse in the "what's new" section. It
57 especially improves readability in non CSS/table capable browsers. Since
58 I don't know what has been done sofar by others I didn't make a
59 compleate recoding of the page.
60
61 Opinions are most welcome / Stefan Huszics :)

Attachments

File name MIME type
whatsnew.xhtml application/xhtml+xml
sauron.vcf text/x-vcard

Replies