Information density.
One thing I really dislike over the last 10+ years the web has brought is a huge reduction in information density.
W3C old site was great at being dense on content/info. This site is not.
W3C Beta Website
11–20 of 81 posts
Re: W3C Beta Website
#12Back in the day there use to be a joke website called "every fucking bootstrap site" [1] where it would lambast the popular design zeitgeist of the time. I really wish websites would opt for more distinctive looks rather than the massive homogenization we see across the web. Everything looks the same when it doesn't have to. Things can be stylized while accounting for accessibility and usability. I don't know what to…
I disagree, I think a degree of homogenization is good for information heavy websites, like government ones [1][2][3] and sites geared towards documentation. Consistency here is good because it makes things familiar and therefore means people spend less time trying to figure things out/find what they're looking for. Creativity isn't necessarily the point with sites like these. Now if you're marketing a product or showcasing something on the creative side, that's a different situation entirely and in that case I agree with you. The Bootstrap wave 10 years ago was indeed excessive.
[2] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/project-gigabit-...
Re: W3C Beta Website
#13I clicked hoping it was Warcraft 3 beta.
Blizzard please give us Warcraft 4.
Re: W3C Beta Website
#14Back in the day there use to be a joke website called "every fucking bootstrap site" [1] where it would lambast the popular design zeitgeist of the time. I really wish websites would opt for more distinctive looks rather than the massive homogenization we see across the web. Everything looks the same when it doesn't have to. Things can be stylized while accounting for accessibility and usability. I don't know what to…
I agree with you... except this IS the W3C, and the whole point is they set standards for websites. If they looked nothing like every other site, that'd actually be a bigger problem.
Re: W3C Beta Website
#15Back in the day there use to be a joke website called "every fucking bootstrap site" [1] where it would lambast the popular design zeitgeist of the time. I really wish websites would opt for more distinctive looks rather than the massive homogenization we see across the web. Everything looks the same when it doesn't have to. Things can be stylized while accounting for accessibility and usability. I don't know what to…
I'd know those FontAwesome icons on https://beta.w3.org/developers/ anywhere.
Honestly though consistency is probably preferred here. I see top nav, a hamburger icon, a breadcrumb title bar and a search button, I have confidence in my expectations for how those will behave. With a documentation site, the ability to navigate and find what you need takes precedence over being 'delighted' by some landing page.
Actually in this case they broke my expectation by having the search just redirect to duckduckgo with a site parameter.
The Memphis seems like a decently modern take as well with the gradients thrown in.
Re: W3C Beta Website
#16Back in the day there use to be a joke website called "every fucking bootstrap site" [1] where it would lambast the popular design zeitgeist of the time. I really wish websites would opt for more distinctive looks rather than the massive homogenization we see across the web. Everything looks the same when it doesn't have to. Things can be stylized while accounting for accessibility and usability. I don't know what to…
bikeshedding isn't helpful.
Re: W3C Beta Website
#17Not sure why previous comments are so harsh towards its design. The very header copy says the W3C strives to help people build web based on several principles, and accessibility is listed first. And this design resembles that - a strong focus on accessibility and feeling familiar and usable for most people. I don't think doing a "less overused" design in there would keep that goal in focus.
Truth be told, there is no reason to believe that what is popular in web design is particularly good for accessibility or the sensibilities of people. In fact, I'd argue "Corporate Memphis" in particular is something that became overused in spite of the fact that it offended sensibilities for many.
That said, I think over-applying the "accessibility" viewpoint to bleed into things that really don't have to do with accessibility is an anti-pattern. I do not feel like KDE is less "accessible" due to the artwork and character mascots of Tyson Tan, even though it may not appeal to everyone's sensibilities. At the end of the day, I'd argue in favor of unique and memorable designs that feel like they have some personality rather than like something a committee carefully constructed to be as inoffensive as they could imagine.
Re: W3C Beta Website
#18[flagged]
Re: W3C Beta Website
#19Back in the day there use to be a joke website called "every fucking bootstrap site" [1] where it would lambast the popular design zeitgeist of the time. I really wish websites would opt for more distinctive looks rather than the massive homogenization we see across the web. Everything looks the same when it doesn't have to. Things can be stylized while accounting for accessibility and usability. I don't know what to…
I disagree with this specifically for the W3C on everything _except_ the illustration on the front, which I have dubbed "big pants people." That's an unnecessarily homogenous design trend, but everything else is homogenous for the purposes of readability and accessibility, which is very inline with the W3C.
Re: W3C Beta Website
#20[deleted]