From: Jason Earl (Jason_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-05 05:16:46
from my experience, people with larger monitors buy them for a reason,
generally that reason being they want to open more windows without as
much clutter. Rarely do they open pages a their max monitor resolution,
to resize themselves to 3200 x 1200, my desktop resolution.
Generally about 12 words per a line is right for normal text. The best
way round this is to use em's where possible to dictate the layout by
default. The option to go liquid or fixed with would be a user option.
This way people can resize the text without break ups. A lot of people
who use high res screens seem to run using a very high dpi, and
therefore tend to shunt the font size up, which can break layouts the
work to an absolute pixel based/fixed layout.
Another thing to bear in mind, a good web design for a site like the
boost site should be designed so that the printed version of the page
uses paper efficiently. If I make a print style sheet, I normally
disable all navigation elements, and keep headers / design as simple /
minimal as possible. Too many sites produce bad print outs where there
is a huge waste due to a left margin caused by a nav bar, and then the
body of the text being cut off on the right because it doesn't fit the
page width. This is typical of pixel based layout that are fixed to a
set width. The print issue is more important with something like Boost
than your average company site, because things like API documentation
is often printed for later reference. many find it easier to read
paper, not to mention not many people have big dual screen layouts to
place the IDE on one window and the documentation etc on the other
If the site was made with CSS, you wouldn't need to concern yourself
should the site be fixed / elastic / liquid as the user can choose. By
default liquid or elastic design is best. I agree with the idea of let
the user resize the screen, as many people will do that to their taste.
From what i can see, is the whole documentation in docbook format? in
that case, it would be nice to see a CHM version for Windows users, as
the indexed search system is very handy, and is ideal for people who
have laptops and might not be online all of the time. Single HTML / PDF
docs are too bulky for many. If everything is in docbook format as
well, it should be easy enough to use a single layout to redo all the
docs should the website's design change a little as everyone is
On 5 Ebr 2005, at 09:17, Paul A Bristow wrote:
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> | [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Rene Rivera
> | Sent: 05 April 2005 05:36
> | To: boost_at_[hidden]
> | Subject: Re: [boost] Re: [website] More "improvements"..
> | I only assume that 10 to 12 words per line is
> | the most pleasing line length.
> | That is what centuries of research and experimentation have shown.
> But that is only for plain text, and nearly all of Boost is broken up
> lines of code and other aids to the eye that the short line length
> so I don't think it is safe to extrapolate this our use.
> (I also note that 'ragged right' has been shown better for reading,
> but when did you last read any printed stuff like that?
> Graphic and web designers are obsessed with overall apperance!)
> So I strongly support Jeff Garland on this -
> "Let the user adjust the width of the browser".
> Paul A Bristow
> Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB
> +44 1539 561830 +44 7714 330204
> mailto: pbristow_at_[hidden]
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk