 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||
 |
 |
 |
|
|||
 |
|
|||||
the flexibility of css has begun a somewhat disturbing trend. many sites now let the user mix and match design elements (background, color scheme, text formatting, etc.). an example would be redcricket.com (please finish reading before accusing me of redcricket bashing).
i wonder if it is a trend or a fad, time will tell. i see little value beyond the gizmo factor and eye candy.
it reminds me of when "interactive" became a buzzword and was applied to everything. people would say things like "you will be able to choose the ending to the movie you are watching". i don't want to choose the ending, i pay money to have a great story teller like stanely kubrick or the coen bothers choose the ending. that is what they are good at, i am not, my ending would suck.
it is the same with websites. as a designer, i take a stand. i design a site to look a certain way. the interface can be a statement supporting site content.
that being said, i applaud sites like redcricket (the best skinable site i have seen) who are pushing the medium further. those experiments may lead to a solution i do agree with, or identify situations where it increases the value to the user.
Posted by griff at April 01, 2002 04:45 PM