4 ms·

You realize a website is fundamentally different than the front door of a house?

• wyck 12y ago
  That's a silly thing to say, really. I will elaborate on my point in case you missed it, form should follow function, this principle applies to architecture just as much as a website. The case with the current trend of animating everything into place reminds me of "Ornament and Crime" which is another architectural idea that can be equally applied to a website. To be blunt, it simply means stop animating/decorating shit into place for effect, it is meaningless and a disservice to real design.
  • andrewliebchen 12y ago
    The analogy is silly. Of course you wouldn't design a door that "constantly moves" but you might design a door that slowly revealed itself as you moved through an architectural experience. And besides, a website is not a door. Certainly, there is good animation and bad animation. Animation for animation's sake in web design is bad. Animation that helps a user manage attention, removes unnecessary affordance until it's needed, delights its user, underscores contextual importance, and/or communicates system action can be good. It's funny that you bring up Loos, because I think he might agree with me here: >My architecture is not conceived by drawings, but by spaces. I do not draw plans, facades or sections… For me, the ground floor, first floor do not exist… There are only interconnected continual spaces, rooms, halls, terraces… Each space needs a different height… These spaces are connected so that ascent and descent are not only unnoticeable, but at the same time functional Says Loos himself.