Jump to content

layout critique


jcombs_31

Recommended Posts

Yes, but again, that is the result of a design decision I didn't make: the use of two context boxes next to each other. The height of each becomes dependent on the other. If one only displays limited content, like contact info, the height of the other is limited as a result.

 

I didn't really change the layout (except for the top, and switching the bottom items), I just trimmed down the Company Info content because I thought it looked better (e.g. compensation for the lack of content in the Contact section). The available space for content is identical for both items in the bottom section: 120px.

 

It still looks pretty good with the same amount of content as in the original though:

 

[attachment deleted by admin]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but again, that is the result of a design decision I didn't make: the use of two context boxes next to each other. The height of each becomes dependent on the other. If one only displays limited content, like contact info, the height of the other is limited as a result.

 

Yes, but what I was referring to is that the height of the content boxes in the original are not dependent upon one another. Only the box to the right even has an outline of any sort to it, so either one could stretch without throwing anything else in the layout off. They are both vertically fluid. That, to me, is a key on a homepage of any kind. You need to have at least one area on the page where you can update content without having to worry about exactly how much content you enter. While the amount of content in the original layout happen to be similar in size, they don't have to be, and they would look "normal" still if they weren't... that's all I was referring to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a silly argument  :P, but I disagree. Placing a box around something doesn't necessarily fix it's size. Whenever you place to objects next to each other, their height is dependent on one and other. I don't think it is something that is open for interpretation.

 

However, in the original, the difference in content was slightly compensated for (~20px) by placing a box around the object with less content, something I reversed (and indeed that probably looks better switched back). This definitely doesn't mean the height is fluid though; 20px is 20px. Maybe you can get away with 30px, but that is about the limit.

 

Top image: unacceptable.

Bottom (single object): acceptable.

 

[attachment deleted by admin]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Top image: unacceptable.

Bottom (single object): acceptable.

 

That is entirely your opinion. This is the battle that comes up over and over again in web design. Why do so many beginning CSS people slave hours over getting the wrapper of a page to stretch the length of the content or sidenav? Because they are not the same length. If every design stuck with fixing side-by-side elements to the same size, the web would truly be a boring place. That's just a silly concept. The whole idea behind web design is preference, and IMO, the top image you showed above is perfectly acceptable.

 

Therein lies the difference in taste ;) ... and being such, I don't think that there will be a solid resolution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

..the web would truly be a boring place....

 

And filled with boxes of equal heigth....  ;D

 

Come on, you know that's not what I meant.

 

Therein lies the difference in taste ;) ... and being such, I don't think that there will be a solid resolution.

 

I guess. I still don't think that top scenario is acceptable though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

..the web would truly be a boring place....

 

And filled with boxes of equal heigth....  ;D

 

Come on, you know that's not what I meant.

 

Therein lies the difference in taste ;) ... and being such, I don't think that there will be a solid resolution.

 

I guess. I still don't think that top scenario is acceptable though.

 

Lol... I'll just review one of the things I want to make sure is clear, and I'll bow out of this one. I do genuinely like both designs, and I think that they both have their place, too. All the things that I've been discussing with 448191 are, IMO, preference issues, and taste is something that can't really be documented fully. I can't even seem to explain my tastes in why I do or don't like a design sometimes ;)... So, that being said, I'll back off and let others discuss their opinions for a while, too. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, you guys still at it? I prefer things to be portioned equally, but it is not always the case.  I will however try to keep a nice grid with this site. I'll probably update my changes later today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.