3 ms·

Let us not forget that you're talking about a time before CSS was available, let alone well supported--let alone _consistently rendered_. This is a time when "w

Let us not forget that you're talking about a time before CSS was available, let alone well supported--let alone _consistently rendered_. This is a time when "web safe color palette" was part of the day-to-day web design lingo. I could see this being a fun challenge, though--how pleasant of a modern-look web page can you make using only HTML <=v4.0; only 256 'web-safe' color palette; limited font choices. One could demo their work via BrowserStack. EDIT: I totally forgot to think about the fact that "whitespace techniques" would have been quite a bit more difficult given that a good 80% of your users were viewing on screens that were either 640x480 or 800x600. On a 640x480 screen, this comment takes up half of the space above the fold.[1] [1] https://imgur.com/x0keeI1 https://imgur.com/x0keeI1

masswerk 9y ago
Another thing often forgotten: font-sizes where relative to the system, meaning, they where usually bigger on Windows (depending on the system-wide font settings) and there was no rational for text-image integration. This became even more severe, when pixels began to shrink with higher display resolutions, where Windows would adjust – i.e. increase – the font-size relatively, while Macs stuck to a positive 72dpi definition for the screen to keep images and text in balance. E.g., you had an image and a few lines of text to its right. Size the layout so that the text will span vertically over the height of the image, when seen on an average Windows system. Now, on a Mac, it's just about 2/3 of the height … (Considering that all layout had to be done using tables, we may begin to understand that you had to be rather defensive in your approaches. Also, complex tables resulted in perceivable rendering times.)