4 ms·
Really? We'll probably have to agree to disagree, but I came into this thread specifically to comment on the styling of the article, and specifically, how dist
by ACow_Adonis 13y ago
Really?
We'll probably have to agree to disagree, but I came into this thread specifically to comment on the styling of the article, and specifically, how distracting and irritating I found it. So imagine my surprise when I come in and find one of the only two comments being a comment about how GOOD the styling on the page is. I was going to comment that I've seen a few pages like this increasingly appearing, where a great deal of effort has obviously gone into the style/layout of the page, it looks very schmick in a "we paid for modern stylists" kind of way, but its overall effect on me has been negative.
The whole thing had this irritating "asymmetrical" feel to it that I just found disconcerting when i just want to read the article, and honestly just left me unable to read it, And for the love of god I will never accept the current trend of "Take sentence from text, blow it up, and insert in its own text box on same page" thing that is obviously taking the journalistic world by storm right now.
- rpedroso 13y agoThe quote technique you're referring to is called a pull-quote, and they have been around for decades. They may have seen a resurgence on the web recently, I couldn't say, but they've been used in magazines as far as I can remember. Like any typographic technique, they can be used poorly, but I thought their use was quite tasteful in this article. They take for granted the fat that many people skim and they help draw attention to key quotes or ideas; I think that's reasonable. I didn't get the sense of "asymmetricality", but to each their own, I guess. In any case, it felt like an improvement over most news sites and blogs.