4 ms·
On my screen the content takes only about 40% of the screen's width. HN on the other hand uses about 90% of the width, just as I would expect.
by jansan 3y ago
On my screen the content takes only about 40% of the screen's width. HN on the other hand uses about 90% of the width, just as I would expect.
- ceejayoz 3y agoHN's 90% width is difficult to read for long-form content; anything more than a few sentences and your eyes are doing far too much work.
- kevincox 3y agoWhile HN uses 90% of the screen width each individual comment is capped to a fairly reasonable width. So the only long text is the title but in that case it is probably also fine because reading one long line is fine and titles very rarely wrap. So I think HN actually does a good job here. It just allows more space for comment nesting.
- ceejayoz 3y agoThe HN width for a top-level (or fairly close) comment is far, far too wide for good readability. (The font is also way too small; I have to read at 133% or higher.) Folks on HN know how to deal with this; Gov.uk users largely don't.
- bloopernova 3y agoIf you have ublock origin, you can use its "my filters" screen to reduce the width of comments: https://gist.github.com/aclarknexient/c39c83f2f97c3c6b1c307c19e516ed6e https://gist.github.com/aclarknexient/c39c83f2f97c3c6b1c307c...
- jansan 3y agoI do not think that I need a a nanny to decide which content width is good for me. I can reduce the window size any time if I decide the content is too wide.
- ceejayoz 3y agoThat's great and all, but sites get to pick a default. Picking readable ones is hardly down a trip to totalitarianism, and the UK government likely has additional legal requirements to serve folks a little less technical than us.