Re: Philosophy of website design
- From: "Nik Coughlin" <nrkn.com@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 08:52:36 +1200
Michael Laplante wrote:
Some people here seem to have a knee-jerk reaction to certain sites or
comments and I wondered why. ZenGarden -- which I think terrifically
showcases the power of CSS -- is sneered at here. I thought that was
an odd reaction for this group. Here, you have this medium that can
be rich with all sorts of audiovisual content, but some of the
regulars here fall back on the belief that only textual content is
everything so design to the lowest common denominator for
accessibility.
Hi Michael,
I've often presented my work both here and in alt.html.critique in the past,
and despite having both lurked and posted here for quite some time, I'm not
sure who the regulars that you are talking about are. I've never had one of
my sites criticised by members of this group for being too, visual, as you
put it.
As an aside, I used the term visual rather than audiovisual because sound on
websites, really, really annoys me unless I've requested it; by clicking
play on a Flash animation, or I'm on a site that I deliberately visit for
the sound, like pandora.com. I'm talking about buttons that make little
clicking sounds when you mouseover, websites that start playing bad (it's
always bad too, what's with that?) music when they load, that sort of thing.
Hate it. Hate it.
.
- References:
- Philosophy of website design
- From: Michael Laplante
- Re: Philosophy of website design
- From: Barbara de Zoete
- Re: Philosophy of website design
- From: Michael Laplante
- Philosophy of website design
- Prev by Date: Re: Philosophy of website design
- Next by Date: Re: Philosophy of website design
- Previous by thread: Re: Philosophy of website design
- Next by thread: Re: Philosophy of website design
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|