4 ms·

Also: This website desperately needs to limit the number of characters per line instead of just going to the side of the screen and wrapping. It's an abominatio

Also: This website desperately needs to limit the number of characters per line instead of just going to the side of the screen and wrapping. It's an abomination on a widescreen monitor.

benhoyt 5y ago
I agree that it'd be easier to read with wrapping, though "abomination" is rather too strong. You can just click "reader mode" in your browser, or size the window down to something readable.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
foxbarrington 5y ago
Agreed. I love many of the articles, but I always have to use Firefox's reader view.
lmm 5y ago
No it doesn't. I like having my text be wide thank you very much. If you want it to be narrow, can't you just make your browser narrow?
- spekcular 5y ago
  I like my text wide too. I think the usual advice of 80–100 characters per line is much too conservative. But as one wide text lover to another: this is clearly beyond the bounds of good taste. Regarding your second question, I don't feel I should be responsible for fixing the formatting mistakes of other people's websites.
  - lmm 5y ago
    > as one wide text lover to another: this is clearly beyond the bounds of good taste. I disagree. I like it as it is. Maybe a small amount of margin (HN-style) would help, but I certainly wouldn't want to see it introduce a maximum width. > Regarding your second question, I don't feel I should be responsible for fixing the formatting mistakes of other people's websites. I think websites should be created ready to be reflowed at the user's convenience - that's the whole point of using HTML over things like PDF. If the user wants a particular max-width, they should have their user agent apply it. Whereas if the website makes its own choice of max-width, it's virtually impossible for the user to "undo" that. (I did try setting "body max-width: undefined !important" in Stylish for a while, but that breaks too many pages)

Also: This website desperately needs to limit the number of characters per line instead of just going to the side of the screen and wrapping. It's an abomination on a widescreen monitor.

benhoyt 5y ago

I agree that it'd be easier to read with wrapping, though "abomination" is rather too strong. You can just click "reader mode" in your browser, or size the window down to something readable.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

foxbarrington 5y ago

Agreed. I love many of the articles, but I always have to use Firefox's reader view.

lmm 5y ago

No it doesn't. I like having my text be wide thank you very much. If you want it to be narrow, can't you just make your browser narrow?

spekcular 5y ago
I like my text wide too. I think the usual advice of 80–100 characters per line is much too conservative. But as one wide text lover to another: this is clearly beyond the bounds of good taste. Regarding your second question, I don't feel I should be responsible for fixing the formatting mistakes of other people's websites.
- lmm 5y ago
  > as one wide text lover to another: this is clearly beyond the bounds of good taste. I disagree. I like it as it is. Maybe a small amount of margin (HN-style) would help, but I certainly wouldn't want to see it introduce a maximum width. > Regarding your second question, I don't feel I should be responsible for fixing the formatting mistakes of other people's websites. I think websites should be created ready to be reflowed at the user's convenience - that's the whole point of using HTML over things like PDF. If the user wants a particular max-width, they should have their user agent apply it. Whereas if the website makes its own choice of max-width, it's virtually impossible for the user to "undo" that. (I did try setting "body max-width: undefined !important" in Stylish for a while, but that breaks too many pages)