Georg: >tedd wrote: >> Your yardstick to measure the "weak/strong" value of a design is IF >> the browser's window generates a horizontal scroll bar? If so, then >> that's your opinion, and my opinion differs. The value of a good >> design should not be tied to browser's window. > >Maybe you're right, but if I have a "yardstick" at all then that must be >lying somewhere in the usability sector. The easier it is to use, the >better it is - regardless of design and window-size.
"Easier" to use for whom? For some, fluid layouts are easier to use, and for others fixed layouts are easier. But, I would guess, that most don't care as long as navigation is obvious and consistent. As such, I don't claim that one layout is better than the other because there are no facts to back up either claim. However, one of the benefits of using css is to cut down on the amount of bandwidth required to produce a page. So, for me one of the "strong" points of a web page is how fast it loads. In that regard, please note that your home page has load times exceeding 46 seconds for 56k modems -- does having 68 images improve something "lying somewhere in the usability sector" ? Also, I don't see a consistent navigation scheme for your site. For example, if someone selects "Corners unlimited", the only option they have of getting back to home is to click the back button -- is that an example of your "easier to use" yardstick? Or, is that tiny "home" image (among the multitude of other images) supposed to be easier for those with vision problems to find? Also, is it just me, or is your "medium" font size larger than your "small"? It's hard to tell -- but, in any event, I'm not calling your site weak, am I? But I will say that we have a considerable difference of opinion on what defines "ease of use." >You won't see me launch any demonstration of anything, unless I am >personally interested in the issue. I don't pick up challenges unless >I'm interested in the result. Are you interested in backing up your claim? You said my solution* was weak. So, I'm asking you to provide better, if you can. If not, then what's the point of claiming someone's solution is weak when you can't provide a stronger alternative? tedd *(which isn't really mine, greater minds than mine thought of it long before me) -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://sperling.com/ ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
