Re: NEW WEBSITE

> 3.  Text that stretches all the way across a screen tends to be more
> difficult to follow (the eye gets lost).
> Take a look at sites like
>
> http://www.winmag.com
> http://www.zdnet.com
> http://www.hotwired.com/webmonkey
>
> to check out their layout.  If you run your monitor at less than 1024x768,
> bump it up their for a second and check out those sites.  They tend to use
> tables to keep the text constrained to a space of about three or four
> inches, no matter what resolution you run.  It's kind of like newspapers
and
> magazines using columns.  The less the eye tracks across, the easier it is
> to read.

> I'd suggest that everyone read Jakob's columns at http://www.devhead.com ,
> he's really on the ball when it comes to usability issues.


I totally agree with both you and Killian in your posts, however, the point
on which I disagree with you both is the one above. 'Liquid' pages that use
the whole width of the browser are (in usability terms) defined as being
better. Mr. Jakob Nielsen says so himself, and develops his own site
(www.useit.com) in that way. This means that the user can adjust the width
of their browser to the width they want it to be to allow them to read the
text comfortably. Not everyone is running the same res, has the same size
monitor or the same font sizes.. you need to keep your text flexible, not
locked up in a 5!? pixel width table.

However, everything has its place, and those sites you mention above use it
well.. just remember, it's not a -law- and liquid pages do indeed read
better in many scenarios, such as on http://www.useit.com/


Regards,
Peter Cooper
Editor, Webpedia
http://www.webpedia.com/

HTML: hwg-critique mailing list archives, maintained by Webmaster @ IWA