3 ms·

All this CSS minimalism reminds me of Dan Luu's post about Web Bloat: https://danluu.com/web-bloat/ https://danluu.com/web-bloat/ His website is refreshingly l

All this CSS minimalism reminds me of Dan Luu's post about Web Bloat: https://danluu.com/web-bloat/ https://danluu.com/web-bloat/ His website is refreshingly light and fast, but that's still no excuse for Times New Roman. Maybe it's a retro irreverence thing.

half-kh-hacker 8y ago
The website actually uses the default font for your browser. I've always changed this to a sans-serif font.
r0bbbo 8y ago
Times New Roman is fine - serif fonts are supposedly more readable - it's the line widths that kill me here - figuring out which line you're due to start on next really disrupts flow
- DanBC 8y ago
  You can resize the window and the text flows to fit, which is something a weird amount of websites prevent you doing. You can ctrl+ to increase font size if it's too small, or ctrl- if it's too big. I dislike the white background, but otherwise it's very readable for the way I use web browsers -- one of some open windows.
  - boomlinde 8y ago
    Browsing the web using half of 1600 pixels in width is a surprising amount of pain in the ass, but perfect for CSS-free sites. It seems that designers tend to design for full screen, which I guess reflects their own workflow, but not at all mine as a programmer.
jypepin 8y ago
a lot of people would argue that his website is very hard to read
- rchaud 8y ago
  That website looks like a professor's hand-coded attempt at a course website for his Combinatorics class. The text layout alone could have been lifted straight from any academic journal, aka the densest, least readable typographic style.
bhaak 8y ago
This is not CSS minimalism, this is NO CSS. How that site is rendered on your device is the default look of any website in your browser before any CSS is applied. This site would actually profit a lot from this minimal CSS as the defaults are bad and on mobile they are even worse.
- extra88 8y ago
  The web bloat page does have a little CSS in the header. If there was a limit on the words per line, that's all I need on desktop. In mobile Safari, the text size is a little small; I think mobile Safari's default font-size is 16px, same as desktop, it should probably be 18px. This site's CSS could make it bigger (wouldn't even need to make it mobile-only). Mobile Safari is doing an okay horizontal scroll for the data tables because they don't fit in the portrait width on my phone; to make it nicer on mobile calls for using different HTML, either repeating the data in the original HTML and selectively displaying them with CSS or using JavaScript to manipulate the data.
andreareina 8y ago
There's also the site (can't find it anymore, anyone got a link?) that offered a different metric for how bloated your site is: divide the total page weight by the same page's contents rendered into a jpeg.
tw20190409mhbcd 8y ago
Hardly anyone is writing their styles to set the body text to Times New Roman. Aside from serif typefaces not actually being so bad, if you're seeing Times New Roman on sites like these, it's because you haven't set your default font and your browser is falling back to it on your system. Fixing this in Firefox is as easy as opening about:preferences in a new window and selecting your preferred sans font. Dan's site will instantly be transformed, and every other site like his (e.g. http://cr.yp.to/ http://cr.yp.to/ https://motherfuckingwebsite.com https://motherfuckingwebsite.com etc) will be rendered similarly for all future visits.

half-kh-hacker 8y ago

The website actually uses the default font for your browser. I've always changed this to a sans-serif font.

r0bbbo 8y ago

Times New Roman is fine - serif fonts are supposedly more readable - it's the line widths that kill me here - figuring out which line you're due to start on next really disrupts flow

DanBC 8y ago
You can resize the window and the text flows to fit, which is something a weird amount of websites prevent you doing. You can ctrl+ to increase font size if it's too small, or ctrl- if it's too big. I dislike the white background, but otherwise it's very readable for the way I use web browsers -- one of some open windows.
- boomlinde 8y ago
  Browsing the web using half of 1600 pixels in width is a surprising amount of pain in the ass, but perfect for CSS-free sites. It seems that designers tend to design for full screen, which I guess reflects their own workflow, but not at all mine as a programmer.

jypepin 8y ago

a lot of people would argue that his website is very hard to read

rchaud 8y ago
That website looks like a professor's hand-coded attempt at a course website for his Combinatorics class. The text layout alone could have been lifted straight from any academic journal, aka the densest, least readable typographic style.

bhaak 8y ago

This is not CSS minimalism, this is NO CSS. How that site is rendered on your device is the default look of any website in your browser before any CSS is applied. This site would actually profit a lot from this minimal CSS as the defaults are bad and on mobile they are even worse.

extra88 8y ago
The web bloat page does have a little CSS in the header. If there was a limit on the words per line, that's all I need on desktop. In mobile Safari, the text size is a little small; I think mobile Safari's default font-size is 16px, same as desktop, it should probably be 18px. This site's CSS could make it bigger (wouldn't even need to make it mobile-only). Mobile Safari is doing an okay horizontal scroll for the data tables because they don't fit in the portrait width on my phone; to make it nicer on mobile calls for using different HTML, either repeating the data in the original HTML and selectively displaying them with CSS or using JavaScript to manipulate the data.

andreareina 8y ago

There's also the site (can't find it anymore, anyone got a link?) that offered a different metric for how bloated your site is: divide the total page weight by the same page's contents rendered into a jpeg.

tw20190409mhbcd 8y ago

Hardly anyone is writing their styles to set the body text to Times New Roman. Aside from serif typefaces not actually being so bad, if you're seeing Times New Roman on sites like these, it's because you haven't set your default font and your browser is falling back to it on your system. Fixing this in Firefox is as easy as opening about:preferences in a new window and selecting your preferred sans font. Dan's site will instantly be transformed, and every other site like his (e.g. http://cr.yp.to/ http://cr.yp.to/ https://motherfuckingwebsite.com https://motherfuckingwebsite.com etc) will be rendered similarly for all future visits.