Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

This is a web page

justinjackson.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 445 posts

Re: This is a web page

#141

Post by adventured »

zanny wrote: post #132
adventured wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, but I'm not sure how the quantity of tags determines the value of the content contained. I can vary a graphic element or photo a near infinite number of ways prior to inserting it via one tag. I wouldn't say that argues in favor of imagery over text, or vice versa, however.

I'm not arguing the value of the content, just the original intent. HTML was just meant to be a markup document language to display rich text over http.

I definitely get you on that. Does that original intent say anything of whether words should be the heart and soul of web design however?

Should black and white photography be the heart and soul of photography just because limitations (or costs) of technology started us there? I'm guessing you wouldn't argue that original intent should define future value, but these are all interesting points to discuss.

Re: This is a web page

#142

Post by Spearchucker »

adventured wrote: post #69

"At it's heart, web design should be about words." No. The web is not just a place for text / words, that is not its heart and soul, and therefore neither is that the case for web design. It really never has been. I see no great argument in favor of words being the core over any other form of expression. Today's bandwidth more than allows for beautiful video, animation, high quality graphics and photos, etc. Or low k…

Your post reminds me of http://www.ftrain.com/wwic.html.

Re: This is a web page

#143

Post by jmagoon »

I'm not sure if this applies to artistic theory, but in film theory there's an entire discipline based around formalist, or stylistic critique.

Briefly, they would say that an effective ideological argument stems from style--two films with the exact same script that are shot, set, lit, and edited differently could have totally different meanings. So, what's most interesting is that your argument perhaps isn't actually about words or content -- it's about the way those words and content are presented.

Re: This is a web page

#144

Post by devilshaircut »

anigbrowl wrote: post #138
devilshaircut wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having webpages that are not bleak and characterless is not a resignation to having webpages that are like highways with unending billboards.

I don't find text to be bleak or characterless; if it needs design that badly, then it's not well-written. And judging by the audience for things like ReadItLater and so on, I'm not alone. I just want the option to read text the way I want, not how someone thinks I ought to be see it, which is more often about getting me to look that providing me with a comfortable reading experience.

I didn't say text is bleak and characterless. I said that having no design variation is bleak and characterless.

Re: This is a web page

#145

Post by kryten »

csomar wrote: post #137

Sorry, but this is not true in many dimensions: 1. He doesn't have an RSS feed. That's a medium many people use it to connect. 2. He doesn't have a mailchimp (or other) list to subscribe to. That's another medium people use. 3. He didn't optimize for Google. That's a huge medium people use to reach content. (he uses analytics, though. guess why) 4. Font size is set in pixels. This is the wrong way to do it if you wan…

There is something infuriating about your post.

It misses the point entirely and concentrates on the banality of the medium rather than the message.

The new web is the old web, rehashed with less content and more money making prospects through complicated meshes of dross leeched from the veins of media startups.

Not using is putting the message first for a change and I applaud that.

Re: This is a web page

#146

Post by anigbrowl »

devilshaircut wrote: post #144
anigbrowl wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find text to be bleak or characterless; if it needs design that badly, then it's not well-written. And judging by the audience for things like ReadItLater and so on, I'm not alone. I just want the option to read text the way I want, not how someone thinks I ought to be see it, which is more often about getting me to look that providing me with a comfortable reading experience.

I didn't say text is bleak and characterless. I said that having no design variation is bleak and characterless.

Then style the web as you fit on your own browser, but don't try to impose your design sensibilities on mine. That's why I keep saying 'client side'. I prefer not to download and process most of the graphic cruft that I see, and vastly prefer reading articles in an RSS reader to visitng pages that remind me of being a shopping mall.

Re: This is a web page

#149

Post by mapgrep »

adventured wrote: post #69

"At it's heart, web design should be about words." No. The web is not just a place for text / words, that is not its heart and soul, and therefore neither is that the case for web design. It really never has been. I see no great argument in favor of words being the core over any other form of expression. Today's bandwidth more than allows for beautiful video, animation, high quality graphics and photos, etc. Or low k…

>The web is not just a place for text/words, that is not its heart and soul... It really never has been.

I am thinking back when they named the protocol the HyperText Transport Protocol and the primary format the HyperText Markup Language, text was indeed the heart and soul of the medium.

At one point, images weren't even displayed inline but via a helper app. This is why Mosaic was a big deal.

Re: This is a web page

#150

Post by bitwize »

adventured wrote: post #69

"At it's heart, web design should be about words." No. The web is not just a place for text / words, that is not its heart and soul, and therefore neither is that the case for web design. It really never has been. I see no great argument in favor of words being the core over any other form of expression. Today's bandwidth more than allows for beautiful video, animation, high quality graphics and photos, etc. Or low k…

The web is not just a place for text / words, that is not its heart and soul, and therefore neither is that the case for web design.

I'd say that text is not only the heart and soul of the web, but also of motherfucking civilization. Animation and video are nice, and great adjuncts to text. But language is still the most common and easy way to store and share information intended to be consumed by humans, and since that's what the Web is all about, it's not only natural that the Web should be language-focused, but also unnatural that it be anything else.

Post reply on HN