Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good designers are often perfectionists. Calling them "compuslives" is dismissive, and is also insulting to people who actually suffer from OCD.
> Good designers are often perfectionists. Symmetry is not perfection. Plenty of unbeatable designs and works of art are non symmetric. And the poster of TFA is not a "good designer" IIRC, merely some annoyed blogger. I was talking about HIS annoyance with an assymetry (that might very well be intended) and not about some designer sweating the small details. > Calling them "compuslives" is dismissive, and is also ins…
> Symmetry is not perfection.
Being a "perfectionist" is not the same as actually producing "perfection." It's about setting extremely high standards. I never said I agreed that the extra 3px was better, but I understand the importance of the decision, however minor.
I also understand that, in most cases, 3px won't actually make much of a difference. But hundreds of pixel-level decisions over the course of an entire project will make a difference in the final presentation. I'm not saying all of them are right or wrong, but unless you're going to A/B test every single debatable bit of padding or margin, deferring to a designer who cares about the presentation and aesthetics makes sense. It is often subjective, but so what? It's the designer's job to care about these things.
I still think that equating this to OCD is simply not accurate. As someone who does not suffer from the disorder, I guess I can't actually speak to whether or not it's insulting, so that was poor word choice. But I do know that living with OCD can be totally debilitating, and to say that it could be "medically accurate for a lot of them" (designers? perfectionists?) is just plain wrong. This is what OCD looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrRqb5cvM5E http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4sadYeLHKU