5 ms·
Old skin, minimum width: https://ibb.co/Pcvn7VP https://ibb.co/Pcvn7VP New skin, same width: https://ibb.co/PgxF8hf https://ibb.co/PgxF8hf Old skin, maximum w
by pwinnski 4y ago
Old skin, minimum width: https://ibb.co/Pcvn7VP https://ibb.co/Pcvn7VP
New skin, same width: https://ibb.co/PgxF8hf https://ibb.co/PgxF8hf
Old skin, maximum width: https://ibb.co/WsptkCY https://ibb.co/WsptkCY
New Skin, same width: https://ibb.co/x8NmgZq https://ibb.co/x8NmgZq
It's probably possible to find screen widths at which comparisons favor the old skin, but all I see is improvement. From old to new, minimum or maximum width, more content is visible, and line lengths are more readable. Kudos on the new design.
- _dain_ 4y agoIf you scroll down past the lede and the table of contents the old design has more information. It's just that giant square of whitespace next to the ToC that is holding back the old one.
- pwinnski 4y agoOn longer articles, you do eventually get to a point where overly-long line widths mean more content fits onscreen at once, but at the cost of readability. Long line lengths are objectively bad for readability[0] and information retention[1], even among people who claim to prefer them. That said, I believe long line lengths are faster. 0. https://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability https://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability 1. https://uxmovement.com/content/how-margins-and-line-lengths-affect-readability/ https://uxmovement.com/content/how-margins-and-line-lengths-...