3 ms·
Well of course, I didn't mean it quite that literally and am a bit sad to see I got downvoted but I guess I did make the point poorly (and mildy aggressively no
by nilliams 12y ago
Well of course, I didn't mean it quite that literally and am a bit sad to see I got downvoted but I guess I did make the point poorly (and mildy aggressively now I read it back).
I should probably just have linked to somewhere the argument has been made before [1].
I'm a nerd and I vastly prefer large type & generous amounts of whitespace over cramming lots of titles on one screen so it saddens me whenever I hear someone authoritatively state the 'information density' argument.
[1] http://uxmyths.com/post/654047943/myth-people-dont-scroll http://uxmyths.com/post/654047943/myth-people-dont-scroll
- davmar 12y agoyou put an awful lot of words in my mouth. i didn't mention scrolling. re-read. the top bar is too large vertically without enough value. readability improves a bit, but the sheer prominence takes away from the discoverability of the first article title. i didn't mention type size or whitespace. i also like large type and generous amounts of whitespace. i think you're just looking to argue for the sake of argument.
- nilliams 12y agoSorry, I'm not looking for an argument and I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. My original post was badly written and overly argumentative, I think I was in a bad mood and a couple of your points just set off my usual UX'y triggers, I apologise. You're right that I made the leap from your dislike of the top nav/footer to a dislike of scrolling/desire for 'information density'. Those things are often associated but I was wrong to make that leap. Again, my bad. I disagree with your points that the header and footer are distracting and detract from the articles, that's it and that's all my original post should have said.