|
|
Posted by dorayme on 01/21/08 23:03
In article <EfmdnaAl7eknhgjanZ2dnUVZ8rGdnZ2d@bt.com>,
"Synapse Syndrome" <synapse@NOSPAMgomez404.elitemail.org>
wrote:
> "dorayme" <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:doraymeRidThis-F86145.08582122012008@news-vip.optusnet.com.au...
> >
> > OK lets look at a typical page:
> >
> > <http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2244122,00.html>
> >
> The basic template for that page is actually pretty old, and it was a while
> ago that I saw the site being used as an example. It is the main front page
> that has recently been redesigned (and made to fit a 1024 screen width, from
> 800).
As Ben C surmised.
OK. The home page looks well. I have not really examined it but
here is just one comment to do with something you asked - liquid
design. I can understand a big site with lots of info not able to
be quite squeezed into 800 wide. But there is no reason for the
bits that do not need to be out of the picture to be out of the
picture.
Look at the search bar at top at 800px for browser and especially
(perhaps paradoxically enough) at very small user text size. Look
at all the room available to the left where it could happily go.
One needs to pause before holding the page up as an example of
good design.
But I admit, it is not all that bad!
--
dorayme
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|