In reply to:
You yourself say you use a "relatively narrow browser window". My point is, everyone sizes their window to what they find readable. This type of design simply allows you to really chose your own size.
My screen is 1024x768 but I typically have my browser about 600 pixels wide to make space for piles of other windows. I don't have any real complaints about what you've said here (assuming that you're saying that people pick a size that they generally like--if you're saying that they resize for each different site they visit, I certainly don't do that), but I return to my point number (2). If many sites that I visit have dead space on the left (or tower ads on the right) and I've sized my browser to take that into account, visiting a site without dead space on the left leaves things feeling too wide. This isn't really a huge deal--my point was really that I think most people using anything bigger than a Palm Pilot will find the current "side" headings very comfortable in spite of the wasted space (I do at 600 pixels), so it's not worth getting rid of the dead space if it means making other usability sacrifices.
In reply to:
But that is the same design as B7, that effect might only happen one in every 200 posts when there is an attachment since it takes one more line getting near the body. Does this effect happen as well in B7?
My complaint only applies to B8, not B7. I only picked on B8 because it seemed to be getting popular []/w3timages/icons/wink.gif[/]. As far as B8 goes, if there were a 1-pixel high line under the "attachment" part it would probably be enough to remove my complaint.
In reply to:
It is not really part of the post, sometimes people like to put a picture and.. no, doesnt seem right. Or like when you do a drawing with text, it can get cut once the pic is over.
When you read some (paper) newspapers (e.g. Philadelphia Business Journal) they have a little picture of the author planted somewhere in the article with the text wrapping around it, so there is some precendent in the non-virtual world. Since the user pic would always be in the same location, and since the user cannot supply alignment options for [image] to give it a location like the user pic, I don't think there's that much chance of confusion. I actually did think of the possibility of the pic getting in the way if you were pasting in computer code (for example). If the user pic is set on a post-by-post basis (I don't know anything about how the user pic was put into W3T--haven't looked at the code in a while) this is easy to get around by just allowing the user to specify that they don't want their pic shown on this particular post. If the user pic is a global quantity that is only set in one location for each user then I don't have a solution for that one.
Bill Dimm,
MagPortal.com - [:red]free feeds for your site.
