• Doc

    Readability works well…yet you insist on constraining your blog to a 987px wide div.

  • @Doc

    Ehm, and what issue is there with that? :) I see no point in widening layout so I can put more stuff in it, I ended up with more space then I need anyway (right sidebar pretty much unused).

    If you mean liquid layouts – overly long lines are a mess to read and widescreen monitors are not exactly uncommon nowadays.

  • Doc


    I have a variety of LCD panels, but my favorite is my TV (1920×1080) and my 22″ monitor (1680×1050). Sites like this leave HUGE bars of wasted space on either side (I’m currently reading this on a 1280×1024 LCD, and the page only takes up the middle 1/3 of the screen. It would be much more readable in, of all things, Readability, which allows me to reformat the page to my liking…which takes advantage of the entire width of the screen. Therefore, your post about “making Webpages more readable” should *itself* employ a more “fluid” layout that exemplifies what you are trying to promote! (In other words, if Web designers took heed, Readability would be unnecessary!)

  • @Doc

    Readability of text is subject of personal preference. I followed some recommended proportions of text sizing and line length when I put together current theme for this blog, as well as my personalt tastes of course.

    There cannot be one true way to format text for everyone. The point of Readability (and other tools like it) is to let user bring reading experience closer to his personal liking, not show that web is wrong.

    By the way I would be interested if you could point out any studies/articles/info that fluid layouts provide better reading experience. Most of information I had read suggests fixed line length, derived from text size and line spacing.

Comments are closed.