I think you meant... (was Re: london.pm.org web site - facelifted (v2))
abw at wardley.org
Sun Dec 14 21:24:05 GMT 2008
Nigel Rantor wrote:
> And I object to this attitude that one is not allowed to voice their
> opinion on a subject if the subject in question is some form of
> open/collaborative effort that one has not contributed to.
I have no objection to you voicing your objections.
> And at the same time that does not invalidate my opinion when it comes
> to usability of sites. I am, after all, a user. One who cares about
I also care about usability and ergonimcs. But that's one of the reasons
why I'm leaning more towards fixed width designs. Readability drops off
quickly when columns get wider than 12-15 words. So a liquid design that
expands to 1600+ pixels is neat from the "cramming content into every bit
of available real estate" perspective, but it really sucks from the
usability side of things.
Of course, typographers have know these things for 100 years or so and we
in the web world are only just figuring it out.
> And if you don't regard testing and feedback as worthwhile in
> that regard then I pity your customers and/or employer.
I welcome testing, feedback and comments, both good and bad. But it is
worth bearing in mind that this is voluntary work and any complaints that are
*too* vociferous may fall on deaf ears. Or be met with directions to the
subversion repository :-)
My customers are, of course, encouraged to complain as loudly as they like,
and demand any kind of colour scheme, layout, or any other feature that they
care for. But then, that's what they're paying for. Business vs pleasure.
More information about the london.pm