Having relied on programs that allowed me to drag and drop just about everything, I am finally learning the beauty, and pain, of html. Ultimately I don't think that we will code the New Athenian, as I just don't have the time to become adequately fluent in html to pull it off. At the rate I am learning, at best it would look like something from 1997 that someone forgot to delete. But, while I might not be able to do it myself, at least I can better appreciate the work of those who write all of their own code.
This experience has also sparked some interesting questions about design. In this brave new web 2.0 world I have been wondering if some sites aren't becoming a little too slick or a little over designed?
Specifically 'web 2.0' refers to the new type of website construction that uses the wonders of the internet to foster and augment true two way communication (i.e. slapping on cool new gadget high speed can accommodate and calling that progress). In a way Wikipedia was web 2.0 before we had the name for it. But today it's evolved into something very different.
This trend has a distinct web 2.0 look associated with it that is decidedly not wiki. There has been the adoption of a certain type of design that is pretty flashy and very impressive. The drawback is that it feels a little too perfect. A little too polished. Super clean! And, ultimately a little claustrophobic? In some cases it allows fluff to replace actual content.
There was something terrible and great about 1997 web sites and I want to discover just what that was. Something about not applying a gradient to absolutely everything...
I'm not advocating going back, but let's remember how many people thought that clean exposed concrete wouldn't be something we'd hate the 70's for forever.
www.macaroondesign.com
- Jason
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment