Find us elsewhere
Join Now Member Login

What’s different about Web content from other types of publishing?

 
New Topic
Post Reply
Follow Topic
Page of 1
  • Author
  • Message
 
CraigL

posts: 9051

Sep 25, 2006 10:59 PM ET    Quote  Report Abuse
Points: 0   Vote
What makes a good graphic layout expert? (Not what makes a good or professional Web designer.)

Over on the "pet peeves" topic, the conversation moved into actual content, and how lots of people sort of expect the Web designer to handle the written content itself. That got me thinking.

As I scan more sites, not to use, but because SuN members have asked for thoughts and critique, I`ve been seeing the Web site concept differently. I seem to divide all sites into three categories:
  1. Amazon-type places, where the search capability is crucial, and generates summary information directly related to my needs;
  2. Wikipedia-type places, where I expect to find a long article and have the time and desire to read it;
  3. Brochure-type sites.
Of course there are all the rest that are confusing, hard to follow, and so forth, but I`m focusing on the good sites. It`s those last, the "brochure" types, that I`d like to hear people comment on.

Would you say that factors such as monitors, lighting, contrast, fonts, and so forth are different electronically than on a piece of paper? Why haven`t e-book readers caught on like wildfire yet? Can we say that a well-designed site looks more like a well-designed 3-color brochure than some other print comparison? If not, what other hardcopy examples come the closest?

Hyperlinks on a Web site far-and-away exceed the old Index at the back of a book. Instant page-turning for lookups, related info, and so forth, make it fantastic: IF it`s used in some "correct" fashion. What is that fashion?

Forums, electronic order forms, calculated fields also make life better than cork bulletin boards and print media in many cases. But why is Web writing going to make life "better" than doing it the old fashioned way?

Content is content. Words are words, so writing is still writing. SEO writing notwithstanding, people still have to read something on a Web site. But LOTS of people have said fonts being too small, distracting colors, and animated Flash are serious peeves.

Aren`t things like that the exact same peeves editors and layout designers have had over the past 100 years? Is it that anyone can pop together a Web site (just as anyone can attempt desktop publishing)?

Basically, I`m looking for a historically successful form of presenting language- and image-based information that we can translate almost directly into Web site design, layout, and structure: Any thoughts?
CraigL2006-9-25 23:1:19
Page of 1
Post Reply
 
.
Advertisement

Keep the Community Clean!

  • StartupNation forums should be used as a platform to learn, educate others, share stories, tips & tricks and to provide constructive feedback.
  • Please do not use the Forums for advertising & blatant self-promotion.
  • Please be respectful to other members and refrain from personal attacks and vulgar language.
  • StartupNation reserves the right to delete any message, reply, and/or member who violates our terms of use.
Read full terms of use
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement