![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
| |||
| |||
|
|
darrel wrote: Common sense. Look around, Osgood. The population in this country is aging. Monitor resolutions are increasing. Portable display devices are shrinking. Just because you are 80 or 90 it doesnt mean that your eyesight cannot be corrected with the aid of glasses to the point where you can read a book or newspaper comfortably. If that were the case publications really would have to be thinking about enlarging the size of the text they use to cater for all these aging people. Just because its the web doesnt mean to say the presentation should suffer. Presentation is enhanced when the end-users can read your type. What makes you think they cant when using pixels? It does because of its limitations but you can give it a helping hand if its possible. You say limitations. Other's say benefits. ;o) What can be achieve in prnt design cannot always be accomplished in web design so I don't see the benefits as you call it. It doesnt matter what PPI the end users monitor is set at. px, ems, % WILL all decrease, or enlarge in size from what you set it at. Uh...right. That's my point. 11px isn't the same size across the board as you seem to assume it is. Bob using an 800*600 monitor may read your site just fine. Next time he's at the library and stuck with the 1280x1600...whoa! His type just shrunk 75%! ouch. Granted, a well designed site will allow him to resize that as he needs to. My point is my presentation will be the same x-browser, small or large. Allowing the end user to have initial control of your site it wont be. My job is to present a page how I proportionally want it to be represented. After I have done that job I can do no more. If the end user then requires to use the zoom tool thats ok by me. So basically if you're serious about accessibility you would need a 'screen resolution sniffer' to feed a different style sheets to cater for this situation. No, if you're serious about web design, you realize that people may change your spec's easily to accomodate their particular needs and design for that. Thats just rubbish. Who the hell changes their browers default text size, god forbid the screen resolution. If you were to conduct a survey I'm willing to bet the majority would'nt have a clue what youre talking about. Its a plug and play world we live it. There are some excellent commercial site designs out there, which push the boundaries in terms of design. I believe that sometimes if you only come from a web designer background you don't push the envelope in presentation enough and so stagnate. Sounds like you are advocating that form should trump function? Nope, what Im saying is its easier to sell a good visual concept designed by a competent designer than one that is designed by a web programmer that isnt. Both designing and being able to code efficiently are equally important but if I have to choose one over the other Id would say being able to design is more important because that IS the end product and the end product is what people buy. 'Coding' is design too. I dont see that point at all. Code is functional I would'nt call it design. Infact it has little to do with design. Not many people like looking at code, its not very exciting, unless of cause you are a web techie. Different things with a lot in common. Design sells. You're talking about decoration and layout. Design is much, much more than just that. I think I addressed that above. I know this thread is pretty old, but whatever... |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |