[thelist] Line lengths + screen sizes (was RE: Site Critique)

[aardvark]

> From: Paul Cowan <paul at wishlist.com.au>
[...] 
> Really? I've never understood this argument. People here use it all
> the time: "readability studies show that line lengths over [x] words
> are hard to read, we should shrink everything to a fixed pixel width."
> 
> No, you shouldn't. I run my screen at 1280x1024; I have my browser
> window maxxed. If I found it hard to read, I would change my
> resolution or resize my window. My having a maxxed browser window at
> that res, perhaps indicates I PREFER that line length?

oddly, and i don't disagree with you, but there are studies i've seen, 
and i've seen this in my own testing, where the user is actually not 
always right about what's easier to use/read...

line lengths are a strange thing... people have reported longer lines 
as easier to read, but have shown in reading comprehension and 
speed tests that it's not the case... i think it's the perception that 
it's easier not to change the window size for every site than to 
muddle through long text, which is an aggregate speed benefit (if 
any), but not reflected on a per-site basis...

anyway, more of a musing than anything, since i can't find that 
fscking report now...

> I am strongly in favour of letting the user have the choice. The user
> will consider the readability vs. visible information tradeoff, and
> form their own opinions. I hate it when sites take up 600 pixels in
> the middle of my screen, leaving an acre of white space. If I wanted
> that, I would shrink my window and set a white desktop background.

agreed... leave the user to decide...

> Liquid designs are far superior for usability, in my opinion.

+1