An entry from the journal

The quickest realign ever

After I came back from holidays, I looked at my site and I felt good about it. You know, most of the time I design something, I’m satisfacted with if for a certain amount of time, then I get bored. It only happens with what I design for myself.

This time it was different. I still liked the idea behind my design, and its implementation, for the most part. I just felt like there was something I didn’t get right. I perceived it as sort of messy and somewhat distracting, which is for me the epitome of what a design shouldn’t be. So I decided to rethink about it.

Special thanks go to my friend Simone, who helped me in identifying a series of little things that I had missed, and even some usability inconsistencies.

Most of the times it’s the little details that make the difference, and being much more painstaking this time, while striving to maintain the ensemble feeling — the old book type-of thing — surely helped me a lot in developing a more solid design.

The biggest change from the very first release, was the column system. Boom. It seems like an obvious thing, but it changed my judgement completely.

I’m surely not reinventing the wheel, but, really, sticking to a well defined grid gives your product a whole different kind of feeling (even if you can break out of it, but that’s another story).

For some reason I’m not inclined to use any kind of CSS framework (even if some of them are cool, and handy for sure); I always build stuff myself, with only Eric Meyer’s reset stylesheet as a base. Of course, this implies much more thinking and calculations.

Now, since difficulties might lead to laziness, perhaps this was the reason why the first version of this website wasn’t that accurate, in terms of spacing (both horizontal and vertical).

Sticking to a four column layout, each one of them equally spaced, helped me in achieving a kind of balance that simply wouldn’t have been possible, otherwise. I also adopted a 16px base unit for vertical spacing: I’ve tried to stick to that rhythm as much as possible, that means (almost) always ensuring that the sum of leading and text size would be 16px or a multiple of it.

This is my version of “Typography for Dummies” perhaps, but it really is something that I completely ignored just a few months ago and that it is absolutely essential (talk about developing knowledge, I will write something about my Web-related lectures soon).

For those of you wondering, this place still hasn’t IE support. I’m not sure IE6 will ever have one, but I’m definitely planning a testing session with IE7.

Speaking of browsers, this website is OK on Google Chrome too (thanks Webkit). Of course by saying OK I’m referring to the layout, and I’m not considering the uglyquestionable Windows font rendering.

Among other goodies, I’ve created an Elsewhere page, where all the stuff coming from the different pieces of me scattered on the web is collected. Feel free to add me, if you want: I won’t bite.

Discussion

The discussion is open. Feel free to post your thoughts; courtesy is required.

  • Fabio Cevasco on Sep 4 2008 §

    The new design looks absolutely awesome man, wonderful work! I wish I had the skills, the time and the will to redesign my site.

    Also thanks for adding me to your “elsewhere” page! I added you to my “links” sidebar: I hope more and more people will discover your shiny blog.

  • Leon P on Sep 7 2008 §

    I really like the old book theme - it puts me in mind of The Name of the Rose.

    I personally always use ems - it actually makes setting up columns easy, as long as you make your body width a multiple of the column widths, margins and gutters. Actually, I think this grid obsession is a bit overrated, but there you go.

    Frameworks are, for me, a pain, and make CSS as complicated as HTML tables.

    line-height is inherited absolutely, so something like body {line-height: 1.5em;} will give everything the same leading. By setting margins to the same line-height you get your vetical rhythm (and I think everything should have a bottom margin, even if books don’t ;) )

    Sorry to waffle on - it’s a lovely looking site!

  • Laburno on Dec 3 2008 §

    My fault, I missed the re-design!
    It’s AMAZING, great work!

  • Michael Tuck on Dec 24 2008 §

    It’s a lovely design. I’d like to try something conceptually similar in the redesign of the site I work with, but the site owner is enamored of the so-called Web 2.0 look. One question: why no right-side padding? In my (admittedly small) monitor display, the content is all the way to the right, without even a few pixels of breathing space. I found the idea of “gridding” this with four equal columns fascinating; it hadn’t struck me that you did that, but now that I know about it, I can see how it impacted your design construct.

    If you decide to write a more detailed article about the process of building this site, let me know. I’d love to read it.

  • Andrea Gandino on Dec 28 2008 §

    Thanks for your kind words, Michael, I really appreciate that!

    Concerning your question, this is an elastic layout that is 80em large, with 1em = 10px in my case. So you do the math, the layout won’t resize horizontally till it’s 800px large, not counting the scrollbar’s width, about 20px: so, for 800px and lower resolutions I had to do a compromise on the layout’s width.

    If you have the chance of using a larger screen, even at 1024×768 you’ll see a nice amount of padding being added to the right and left of the page.

    I’m sure I will write something about this, and how I came up with this particular layout. Maybe, if I have the time, I could even produce kind of a new layout for smaller screen resolutions and mobile devices too.

    Thankyou again for your sharp remark.

  • Michael Tuck on Dec 31 2008 §

    LOL, Andrea, I’m a sharp kinda guy, especially sharp-tongued…

    Unfortunately, on my home computer I’m limited to an 800x600 display if I want to keep this old and cranky monitor happy. It is very, very restrictive. I won’t go into the endless arguments about whether one should design for the 800 users; you’ve made a valid choice. On the larger displays there is a nice bit of padding on the sides as you say. I’ve never seen anyone do an elastic layout quite like this one. It combines most of the advantages of fixed and fluid layouts. Nice job, and I think the tradeoff is worth it.

    I’m sure I will write something about this, and how I came up with this particular layout.

    I’d be very curious to read it when you get a chance to write it. I’d encourage you to write a version for SitePoint.

    In my last post I did not mention how much I liked your choice in fonts/typography. It is very instructive to see how much mileage you’ve gotten out of Georgia, made fresh by good choices in smallcaps, line-heights, and such.

Post your remark

Required fields are marked by an asterisk (*). You can use some basic XHTML.

External resources

Just a bunch of articles I’ve came to bookmark that somehow are in topic with what you just read.

Bad Behavior has blocked 123 access attempts in the last 7 days.