5 ms·
I wonder what the website equivalent of concrete is. "There is often an emphasis on graphically expressing in the external elevations and in the whole-site arc
by platz 11y ago
I wonder what the website equivalent of concrete is.
"There is often an emphasis on graphically expressing in the external elevations and in the whole-site architectural plan the main functions and people-flows of the buildings."
This might suggest ways to express navigation that are explicit and not hidden
- ktRolster 11y agoI'm tempted to reply that a brutalist website would be one that keeps decoration to a minimum, but.....that wouldn't fit, because (for example) the Geisel Library has plenty of decoration, it's just in concrete and glass. Maybe a brutalist HTML page would have the tags embedded, kind of like the WordPerfect codes.
- petercooper 11y agoA bit like the Hotmetal editor from 90s? :-) http://literacy.kent.edu/Midwest/Graphics/hotmetal.jpg http://literacy.kent.edu/Midwest/Graphics/hotmetal.jpg
- USAnum1 11y agoAnother thing I thought of was using the <table> tag for layout. It's austere, as well as an anti-pattern when used exclusively. Despite this, it just plain gets the job done. It has also proven quite sturdy/reliable, even on popular sites like this one.
- blowski 11y ago> it just plain gets the job done Depends on the job.
- cmiller1 11y agoOne of the things I kind of miss about the table based layouts of yesteryear was it seemed to be a lot easier to make sites that looked good in terminal/text based web browsers. The modern idea of doing all of your actual layout in CSS doesn't degrade as well for text based browsers. Here's a challenge for you frontend hackers out there: show me a now standard <ul> based horizontal nav-bar... that also renders horizontally in w3m and lynx.
- duderific 11y agoI've always felt a little uncomfortable using <ul> for a horizontal nav bar (although I'm aware that is a common usage). <ul> is a block level element and so is not semantically correct for a horizontal set of elements.
- majewsky 11y ago> <ul> is a block level element This just happens to be the default style. At its core, <ul> is an unordered list. Whether you happen to arrange the items horizontally, vertically, or any other way, is just presentation. Which is precisely why CSS is separate from HTML.
- erikpukinskis 11y agoWhy does it have to render horizontally? I think the goal is that the text-based layout is just a simple outline, and CSS is used to get a spatial layout. It sounds like you want a little of both worlds. You're right tables can be hacked to do that, but you're going against the grain of the technology, and I'd ask what you hope to gain? I think many "frontend hackers" spend their time focused on what can be done and not enough on what should be done. This is a side-effect of our hyperspecialization culture which discourages designers and developers pushing back on each other, out of fear of stepping on each others' expertise. But I think that fear prevents the kind of real collaboration that's required to make a great UI.
- pvg 11y agoWe already had the website equivalent of béton brut in the formative stages of the web. Just about all websites were the correct color. https://www.google.com/search?q=mosaic+browser&safe=off&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS545US545&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiF7fWSu5fMAhVB02MKHd5_CSwQ_AUIBygB&biw=1313&bih=785 https://www.google.com/search?q=mosaic+browser&safe=off&rlz=...
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- JimmyM 11y agoI think that exposing and styling some of the hidden elements - <script> or <noscript> or <meta> or <link> or whatever - would also be in keeping with the ethos. Unless that's what you meant and I'm just repeating you, I'm not sure.