Posted by Harlan Messinger on 01/23/08 17:13

mrcakey wrote:
>
> I think we all might be wasting a lot of keypresses and bandwidth on this
> issue. Perhaps people have different agenda and we should just agree to
> disagree.
>
> My own two cents:
>
> Letting the user's browser control so much of the layout is a nice goal -
> user's font, user's screen size, maximum accessibility etc., but while it's
> appropriate for some sites, people get paid an absolute fortune to work on
> the aesthetics of a company's branding (aesthetics being distinct from
> design). These people know what they're doing - there are combinations of
> white space and visual elements that work and combinations that don't. It's
> wrong to castigate these people for wanting a site laid out the way they
> specify.

People get paid an absolute fortune to work on the aesthetics of a
company's headquarters. These people know what they're doing - there are
combinations of texture and form that work and combinations that don't.
It's wrong to castigate these people for wanting a building to look the
way they specify--even if it can't be physically achieved using
real-world building materials, and even if it would result in a
structure that would be unsafe or unpleasant to occupy or inadequate for
the purpose for which it's intended or likely to deterioriate in a very
short period of time.

[Back to original message]