3 ms·
You complain of 'ugly', but your 'beautified' version is harder to read, and I have normal vision and am using a big screen. It's a typical example of "designin
by vacri 9y ago
You complain of 'ugly', but your 'beautified' version is harder to read, and I have normal vision and am using a big screen. It's a typical example of "designing for me", not "designing for everyone".
Screw the CSS, let the thin page stand as a thin page.
- alphaalpha101 9y agoWhat's wrong with 'designing for me' when it's his own stylesheet for the page?
- vacri 9y agoBecause he's wanting the source to implement it server-side, for everyone. No-one would give a rat's arse if he was designing it for his own consumption and leaving the source alone.
- ComputerGuru 9y agoI don’t know. All the objective literature I’ve read to date (sorry on a phone right now) has been to avoid harsh contrast, increase line spacing, avoid extreme contrast, and set a cap on max width. Just because you have a big screen (I wrote it on a 30” 4K monitor myself) doesn’t mean it’s wise to extend the content from Edge to Edge (not that this content is long enough to do that).
- Moru 9y agoSome people need the whole size of the screen to be able to read. If you put a hard limit on the width, they will be very unhappy when they blow up the font-size to 200... But I doubt this works on any modern homepage anyway. Was a long time since I met these users last time. At that time there was still Netscape.
- pault 9y agoIf you want to accommodate people with impaired vision who use large font size, define your content width in ems. I believe 90 characters per line is recommended but that's off the top of my head and I could be wrong.
- tripzilch 9y agoI haven't seen anyone advocate to avoid "harsh" contrasts. Just people complaining about how it makes stuff harder to read. Which it does.