Re: Web Designers (was: The ability to turn off animations in browsers)

Besides what you write ("A web designer is really a designer of media for
consumption") another problem is with the current approach is the overuse of
javascript also makes the content they produce to be harder to index. What's
the use of a cool application if less people find it actually? But it should
have been expected, since in HTML 5 and CSS 3 the visuals have been
developed, and almost nothing about semantics.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Woolley" <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Cc: "W3C HTML Mailing List" <www-html@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 9:41 AM
Subject: Web Designers (was: The ability to turn off animations in browsers)


> Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
>> On 11/06/2013 08:06, David Woolley wrote:
>
>>
>> It also has a disproportionate number of people who write about "web
>> designers" or "stylists" (in quotes, for effect) to show their disdain,
>> it seems ;)
>
> The reason I put "web designer" in quotes, was that the web is actually
> the hyperlinks that produce a rich network between multiple sites, whereas
> most people designing documents are not interested in designing to create
> such a web, and the network of links is a very low priority.
>
> A web designer is really a designer of media for consumption using the
> graphical rendering capabilities of "web" browsers, rather than their web
> capabilities.
>
> I don't think I have ever used "stylists" in quotes.
>
> I would note that I find a lot of people, at least amongst the over 45s,
> who really would prefer simple, static, "web site" design, and really do
> not like the trend to pop-ups, disguised links, etc.  These are not people
> of whom I've been asking leading questions.
>
> -- 
> David Woolley
> Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
> RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
> that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2013 08:23:49 UTC