[Web4lib] Nielsen's Top 10 - 2005 version

Thu Oct 20 16:51:03 EDT 2005

Jennifer,

I am the one who said that aesthetics play a part. So of course I have to
jump in and defend myself - it's the way of listservs...

Fist, I think there is potential for blame to be placed on web technologies
(those new fangled things are out of control). Of course you don't have many
of the options we are talking about (font size increase, etc.) with books
without reprinting them in a larger font.

Second, regarding books, when they are published someone works on the
aesthetics of the book and they do play a part in the user's experience.
Websites are the same way. If I want to get a point across, the context of
the point carries value. If someone can't get beyond the context to see the
point that's my problem but one I am willing to live with. I for one am glad
the WWW is not one mass of text.

- Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
[mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Jennifer Heise
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 1:21 PM
To: web4lib at webjunction.org
Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Nielsen's Top 10 - 2005 version

However, the question of font size and page width are somewhat connected, as
those who need large font sizes and images generally do browse with lower
resolution views, even if they have to get someone to adjust their screen
settings to do it.

Someone else, in this thread, said that 'aesthetics play a part.'
To be honest, after years of working with users on sites whose layout was
designed by people who were concerned about the look, I don't buy that
aesthetics qua aesthetics should play a part. What the real users who are
using the pages to do something want and need should play a part, yes-- but
that's their aesthetics, if anyone's, not ours

Some users may like artificially added white space/margins on the sides of
their pages and find it makes the page easier to use. Others may not. Your
Users May Vary. I'm in the process of redesigning a site that uses fixed
content widths and external margins, and I'm finding that the people who
have used this site would like the margins to go away.

I've been through 7 major website redesigns and worked with the end users
afterwards, and I now have the theory that whenever a designer comes up a
design principle or element that he/she thinks is extremely well-crafted and
elegant, they should immediately strike it out, because it will almost
always cause immense annoyance to the users when implemented.

On 10/19/05, Erik Kraft <ekraft at uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
> Just to clarify: I'm all for relative font sizes that can be resized 
> in all browsers. I know the fixed/frozen terminology gets confusing, 
> but I was only addressing the issue of overall page width in my original
post.
> On Nielsen's list, the overall page width issue is separate from the 
> font size issue.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Erik.
>
> Norma Hewlett wrote:
>
> >I totally agree with Lynne. My vision is 20/30 with glasses, good 
> >enough so I can drive a car, and very far from being legally blind. I 
> >keep my monitor set to 800x600 and my browser text size set to 
> >largest font. (See, I know how to adjust the settings.)
> >
> >I hate web pages with fixed fonts, especially those with less than 12 
> >point type. Most of the time I just skip those pages. (Did you put 
> >all that effort into designing your page so people will skip it 
> >without reading it?) I don't care how nice the page layout looks if I 
> >can't read the text. If I really need to read the content, I copy it, 
> >paste it into Word, and enlarge the font there. (So much for the page 
> >layout!)
> >
> >The Windows magnifying glass may be a good tool for enlarging pixils 
> >but it's a terrible way to read a page. I defy anybody to use it on a 
> >regular basis. Anyway, why should I need a magnifying glass to read 
> >your web site? I thought the idea was to put out the information in a 
> >form that will attract readers, not make things difficult for them.
> >
> >Jean Hewlett
> >
> >All opinions are my own, and do not represent my employers.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Bob Rasmussen <ras at anzio.com>
> >Date: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 1:17 pm
> >Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Nielsen's Top 10 - 2005 version
> >
> >
> >>On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Lynne Puckett wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Erik,
> >>>The biggest problem with fixed fonts, as far as my aging eyes
> >>>
> >>>
> >>are concerned,
> >>
> >>
> >>>are the ones with tiny type that will NOT enlarge in the browser
> >>>
> >>>
> >>(especially> if it's IE)...
> >>
> >>First, I want to say that philosphically I support putting as much 
> >>controlas possible in the hands of the user. If they don't know how 
> >>to size their window, or set their preferred font size, then that's 
> >>an opportunity to help them take control of their computer system 
> >>for other sites as well.
> >>Now, from the user's perspective. There are a couple of things users 
> >>can do to their Windows systems in general to increase visibility:
> >>
> >>1. Change the "DPI" of the monitor. If you go to Display Properties, 
> >>then Settings, then General (at least on XP), you'll find the DPI 
> >>setting.
> >>Increasing the DPI setting yields larger text for most Windows 
> >>display operations.
> >>
> >>2. There is a handy magnifier in Start Menu:All 
> >>Programs:Accessories:Accessibility:Magnifier. This opens a magnifier 
> >>at the top of the screen, that shows a blowup of the screen area 
> >>surroundingyour mouse pointer. Besides reading small text, it is 
> >>useful for seeing exact pixel content when you're doing various 
> >>design tasks.
> >>
> >>Note that these things are issues for reasons other than aging eyes. 
> >>Some display devices are coming out with higher dot density for 
> >>various reasons.
> >>
> >>Regards,
> >>....Bob Rasmussen, President, Rasmussen Software, Inc.
> >>
> >>personal e-mail: ras at anzio.com
> >>company e-mail: rsi at anzio.com
> >> voice: (US) 503-624-0360 (9:00-6:00 Pacific Time)
> >> fax: (US) 503-624-0760
> >> web: http://www.anzio.com
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Web4lib mailing list
> >>Web4lib at webjunction.org
> >>http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >_______________________________________________
> >Web4lib mailing list
> >Web4lib at webjunction.org
> >http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4lib at webjunction.org
http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/