Extreme Confusion

Thanks for the constructive criticism. Here's the problem.
On your T&C page you say that we can't know:

- How big the user's browser window is, in either inches or pixels.
- What fonts the user will actually see.
- What size those fonts will appear.
- What text foreground and background colors the user will see.

And we say, yes. Normally true. But COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE.

Imagine going to a printer to get some business cards, and he says:

- I can't tell you what size they will be.
- I can't guarantee which font I'll actually use.
- I can't guarantee where on the card or how big those (undefined)
fonts will appear.
- I can't tell you what color paper or ink I'll be using.

Would say OK? Or look for another printer?
We looked for another printer. And he said...

- Since we can't know how big the window is, let's pick a minimum and
center the work.
- Let's guarantee the font by using anti-aliased pictures of it.
- Let's guarantee the size and placement of text by using only pictures
of it.
- Let's guarantee the colors by making them part of the pictures.

And we said, It's not perfect, but it's better than giving up and
accepting something that's

COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE.

Thoughts?

This is typically the attitude of someone new to web design. But
remember, grasshopper, the single-most important thing about web design
is this:

It's not about what YOU want!

It's about giving visitors what THEY want. And as long as you refuse to
adjust your thinking, your visitors will find what they want somewhere
else. (Remember that girl in high school that wouldn't you-know-what?)

Are you suggesting we all start porn sites?

help (AT) osmosian (DOT) com wrote:

On your T&C page you say that we can't know:

- How big the user's browser window is, in either inches or pixels.
- What fonts the user will actually see.
- What size those fonts will appear.
- What text foreground and background colors the user will see.

And we say, yes. Normally true. But COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE.

That is your opinion. It, unfortunately, does not have much to do with

reality. Your attempt to make a sculpture look like a painting strips the
advantages of one medium while gaining little of the other; a net loss.
Your site has none of the liveness or feedback that is commonly
expected. It does not function in a way that is commonly expected. Doing
*that* is:

COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE.

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

Re: http://pages.prodigy.net/chris_beall/TC/index.html
<help (AT) osmosian (DOT) com> wrote:

Imagine going to a printer to get some business cards, and he says:

If you want to publish on paper, then publish on paper. The web is not
paper <http://www.westciv.com/style_master/house/good_oil/not_paper/>.

Complaining that the web doesn't work like the paper you're familiar with
is like an ice sculptor complaining that ice doesn't behave like marble, or
or like clay, or like wood.

If you're going to create using a medium, then learn the strengths and
weaknesses of the medium, and design your creation accordingly. Fighting
the very nature of the medium is futile.
--
Darin McGrew, mcgrew (AT) stanfordalumni (DOT) org, http://www.rahul.net/mcgrew/
Web Design Group, darin (AT) htmlhelp (DOT) com, http://www.HTMLHelp.com/

Why is "abbreviated" such a long word?

help (AT) osmosian (DOT) com wrote:

When we recently launched our website, www.osmosian.com, it was
classified by Jack Klein as "hideous" and "abusive", and by Randy
Howard as something that "looks like crap".

If your rogue employee Dan had not "launched" it with deceptive spam
more commonly associated with penis enlargement pills, the reactions to
it might not have been so virulent. Is any of this sinking in, yet?

Others, however, said it was "nice and simple", "quite pretty", and a
"very slick" implementation of the AJAX philosophy.

We're confused. Can a woman be both unbearably ugly and delightfully
pretty at once? Of course not. So how can a web site be so?

Comments?

On Sun, 18 Feb 2006, help (AT) osmosian (DOT) com wrote, without the usual
courtesy of an attribution:

On your T&C page you say that we can't know:

- How big the user's browser window is, in either inches or pixels.
- What fonts the user will actually see.
- What size those fonts will appear.
- What text foreground and background colors the user will see.

And we say, yes. Normally true. But COMPLETELY UNREASONABLE.

We can just see how well you would tackle the job of designing a
garment for the mass market! You'd throw your hands up in horror
complaining about all those different sized bodies out there - some
thin, some fat, some short, some tall - and declare the problem
insoluble. And yet there are folks who make their living doing that
job successfully.

But the web goes one better than that, because it doesn't even need
the original design to be adapted and made in different sizes, like an
actual garment. Given the right hints, one and the same design can be
sent out to anyone, and their browser can adapt it to their situation.

This virtual garment really can adapt *itself* to fit a wide, wide
range of requirements, if you will only decide to allow it.

On 19 Feb 2006 01:23:10 -0800, in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.site-design , "cruiserweight"
<bayon86 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> in
<1140340989.992069.32280 (AT) g47g2000cwa (DOT) googlegroups.com> wrote:

This is typically the attitude of someone new to web design. But
remember, grasshopper, the single-most important thing about web design
is this:

It's not about what YOU want!

It's about giving visitors what THEY want. And as long as you refuse to
adjust your thinking, your visitors will find what they want somewhere
else. (Remember that girl in high school that wouldn't you-know-what?)

What I hate about web design is the horrible lack of typeface options.
I love type, I love matching the look of the type to the content of
the work. All I can do on the web, practically speaking, is have an
input to the serif/sans question. I have adjusted my thinking, but I
refuse to make my peace with it.


--
Matt Silberstein

Do something today about the Darfur Genocide

http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org

"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"

Right. Yes. It sank in the first day and we immediately "ceased and
desisted". Then we bought ads on CodeProject, Google, Yahoo, etc. You
can be sure that our "spamming" days are over.

Responding to "Alan J. Flavell".

We don't agree with your analogy. A single "kind" of garment - basic
style and especially color and material - can be made in different
sizes without losing its "character". We don't think its unreasonable
to expect computers of the twenty-first century to preserve our layout,
colors, and fonts. PDFs do. Why shouldn't the web? Why shouldn't we
WANT the web to do so? Why should we all just accept such a
ridiculously unreasonable working environment?

Besides, we didn't "declare the problem insoluble". Just the opposite.
We spent our own time and money and we're betting our future on the
solution we've (not proposed but) actually implemented. Perhaps it will
inspire (rather than infuriate) someone.