5 ms·

Although I’d agree with the fact that gwern does have a more going on, I definitely don’t think your site is any more minimalistic, I’d ever argue it is far far

Although I’d agree with the fact that gwern does have a more going on, I definitely don’t think your site is any more minimalistic, I’d ever argue it is far far from it. My first reaction was « THAT’s minimalistic ?? »

hypertele-Xii 5y ago
Can you elaborate on what you find superfluous?
- icelancer 5y ago
  Colors. Lots of them.
  - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
    Black, white, magenta, and orange. That's a lot to you? It's very few to me.
    - enriquto 5y ago
      you only need two colors: background and foreground
      - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
        That would be the absolute extreme of minimalism, yes. But it's a never-ending rabbit hole. I don't really need a website, either. So the absolute extreme minimalist website is one that doesn't exist. To me, colors are important. I'm a visual artist. The minimal amount of colors to me is an additional two to your two. It's not arbitrary, I didn't just go crazy with colors, I settled on exactly four because I couldn't reduce it to three.
        iamacyborg 5y ago
        > So the absolute extreme minimalist website is one that doesn't exist. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what minimalistic design means. If you've identified that you need a website, minimalism would be paring that down to the core essentials and ensuring it has everything it needs, but nothing more, to suit its purpose.
        hypertele-Xii 5y ago
        That's exactly what I've done.
        carrolldunham 5y ago
        Why does it need a background image?
        hypertele-Xii 5y ago
        Because the artist requires it. Websites exist to serve content. The author of this page demanded it have a background image. Here's another page that doesn't: https://hypertele.fi/b40bfc44ff8a22df https://hypertele.fi/b40bfc44ff8a22df
        antiframe 5y ago
        That subtle background gradient is lovely. I like how it adds a frame to the text without distracting from it. It evokes the right vibe, I think. That's a design element that serves the functionality well and doesn't feel superfluous at all. But the image on the colophon page I'm less excited about. It gets in the way and feels unnecessary.
    - chanc3e 5y ago
      Yourself and Gwern both need to learn how typography works before you declare yourselves arbiters of digital design. On the plus side, your site is friendly in reader view. • Never justify text in digital • Never right align long form in digital • Both need to learn balance between type size and line height
      - creata 5y ago
        From the article, it looks like Gwern, at least, thought quite a lot about text justification --- see the "Abandoned" section --- so the "learn how typography works" comment seems a bit unfair.
        chanc3e 5y ago
        Agreed. I should have said ‘understand’. My point being that applying rules learnt from hundreds of years of literary culture and printing do not 1:1 translate into digital. Justified copy is as much about saving paper as it is about any formality/legibility. It really has no place in long form digital space where space is infinite. Type designers like consistent and even rhythm between the ink and page. Rivers of white and large gaps between words give the ick.
- bradley_taunt 5y ago
  (Not OP) But I would point out the “fixed” elements used for the top and bottom bars eats away a large amount of real estate for users (I’m using an iPhone SE for reference) Just my two cents.
  - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
    This is a completely valid issue and difficult to address. I've been testing on my phone, and my phone admittedly may have a screen larger than average. Some devices just aren't suitable for some types of content.
    - bradley_taunt 5y ago
      > Some devices just aren't suitable for some types of content I think that’s rather dismissive when said content is simple text in the browser. Easy solution: don’t use fixed navigation - it is a very bad UX pattern for content/informational websites. That’s why scrolling exists. I assure you that users don’t require access to your menu 24/7 when reading through your website.
      - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
        > I think that’s rather dismissive when said content is simple text in the browser. Content is not simple text in this case. My site is designed for visual arts and experimental literature, including poetry.
        bradley_taunt 5y ago
        My point is that if it is built out in HTML - it should work on any device that can render HTML. Many other art-based, photography focused and creative writing projects work fine in my browser. You seem to just be avoiding the removal of bad UX patterns (fixed elements) for personal reasons - which is fine. But you shouldn’t hint towards the fact that it’s “how things are” and they “can’t be fixed”. You’re hurting user experience for personal preference - not limitations.
lgvld 5y ago
lol yes, the site is not at all (what one would call) minimalistic.

hypertele-Xii 5y ago

Can you elaborate on what you find superfluous?

icelancer 5y ago
Colors. Lots of them.
- hypertele-Xii 5y ago
  Black, white, magenta, and orange. That's a lot to you? It's very few to me.
  - enriquto 5y ago
    you only need two colors: background and foreground
    - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
      That would be the absolute extreme of minimalism, yes. But it's a never-ending rabbit hole. I don't really need a website, either. So the absolute extreme minimalist website is one that doesn't exist. To me, colors are important. I'm a visual artist. The minimal amount of colors to me is an additional two to your two. It's not arbitrary, I didn't just go crazy with colors, I settled on exactly four because I couldn't reduce it to three.
      - iamacyborg 5y ago
        > So the absolute extreme minimalist website is one that doesn't exist. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what minimalistic design means. If you've identified that you need a website, minimalism would be paring that down to the core essentials and ensuring it has everything it needs, but nothing more, to suit its purpose.
        hypertele-Xii 5y ago
        That's exactly what I've done.
        carrolldunham 5y ago
        Why does it need a background image?
        hypertele-Xii 5y ago
        Because the artist requires it. Websites exist to serve content. The author of this page demanded it have a background image. Here's another page that doesn't: https://hypertele.fi/b40bfc44ff8a22df https://hypertele.fi/b40bfc44ff8a22df
        antiframe 5y ago
        That subtle background gradient is lovely. I like how it adds a frame to the text without distracting from it. It evokes the right vibe, I think. That's a design element that serves the functionality well and doesn't feel superfluous at all. But the image on the colophon page I'm less excited about. It gets in the way and feels unnecessary.
  - chanc3e 5y ago
    Yourself and Gwern both need to learn how typography works before you declare yourselves arbiters of digital design. On the plus side, your site is friendly in reader view. • Never justify text in digital • Never right align long form in digital • Both need to learn balance between type size and line height
    - creata 5y ago
      From the article, it looks like Gwern, at least, thought quite a lot about text justification --- see the "Abandoned" section --- so the "learn how typography works" comment seems a bit unfair.
      - chanc3e 5y ago
        Agreed. I should have said ‘understand’. My point being that applying rules learnt from hundreds of years of literary culture and printing do not 1:1 translate into digital. Justified copy is as much about saving paper as it is about any formality/legibility. It really has no place in long form digital space where space is infinite. Type designers like consistent and even rhythm between the ink and page. Rivers of white and large gaps between words give the ick.
bradley_taunt 5y ago
(Not OP) But I would point out the “fixed” elements used for the top and bottom bars eats away a large amount of real estate for users (I’m using an iPhone SE for reference) Just my two cents.
- hypertele-Xii 5y ago
  This is a completely valid issue and difficult to address. I've been testing on my phone, and my phone admittedly may have a screen larger than average. Some devices just aren't suitable for some types of content.
  - bradley_taunt 5y ago
    > Some devices just aren't suitable for some types of content I think that’s rather dismissive when said content is simple text in the browser. Easy solution: don’t use fixed navigation - it is a very bad UX pattern for content/informational websites. That’s why scrolling exists. I assure you that users don’t require access to your menu 24/7 when reading through your website.
    - hypertele-Xii 5y ago
      > I think that’s rather dismissive when said content is simple text in the browser. Content is not simple text in this case. My site is designed for visual arts and experimental literature, including poetry.
      - bradley_taunt 5y ago
        My point is that if it is built out in HTML - it should work on any device that can render HTML. Many other art-based, photography focused and creative writing projects work fine in my browser. You seem to just be avoiding the removal of bad UX patterns (fixed elements) for personal reasons - which is fine. But you shouldn’t hint towards the fact that it’s “how things are” and they “can’t be fixed”. You’re hurting user experience for personal preference - not limitations.

lgvld 5y ago

lol yes, the site is not at all (what one would call) minimalistic.