WSA Winner
Tuesday August 23rd, 2005
Just getting back into the swing of monthly awards, so we had a few candidates dating back to August for this round ... and it seems that experience wins out over youthful exuberance once again.
I don't think there's one of us that hasn't felt the effect of A List Apart in our work. Whether it lead us down the path of Standards, crystalised a web design principle in our minds, or simply showed us how to make a print stylesheet, its influence is far reaching and more than helpful. So it's fitting that an institution like this should have a design worthy of its stature.
The Jason Santa-Maria/Eric Meyer/Jeffrey Zeldman super team have produced a much talked about site that does what a good design should do -- make the content even better. Condolences to the team behind the Elan website (runners-up), but there's no stopping this juggernaut!
“I love the simplicity of this site and the way it brings the focus where it matters -- on the content.”
D.
Keith Robinson
Original review:
I'll keep it short and sweet shall I; we may need some space for comments.
Simply a fantastic job done on one of the web standard community's most influential sites, recorded here because it should be.
Reviewed by John Oxton
#1
Oh John, how could you.
Only joking, great redesign, particularly loving the illustrations accompanying the recent articles.
Posted by Stuart Frisby :: August 23rd, 2005 at 10:11 PM
#2
What... no griping about the breaking of the 8x6 rule?
Pah, good for them.
Heh... really though, if anyone else in the world had done this design, would it still have won so much praise as it's getting now? Seriously. For all the credit it gets for being clean, it's also quite bland.
Posted by Anton :: August 24th, 2005 at 03:36 AM
#3
If you look at http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/archives/a_list_taken_apart.html and http://www.jasonsantamaria.com/archive/2005/08/23/a_list_apart_redesign.php it explains the reasoning behind the concerns that Anton expresses above.
I feel that this iteration of ALA is a lot more enjoyable to read and browse, and look forward to seeing how well the edition-specific "faces" will work in the future.
Posted by Dave Cardwell :: August 24th, 2005 at 10:59 AM
#4
So when a site such as ALA does something that a lot of designers have wanted to do for a while such as designing for a minimum of 1024*768, does this give the green light for the rest of us (without going into a target audience argument).
Its not so much the resolution issue with me, but the fact that IE/Mac has been given the big finger. Check it out and you'll see the navigation is non-existent and replaced by a big black block. I hope this does indicate a 'go' sign for us as I'm sure I'm not the only one that has had to pollute their CSS with extra hacks just to please this browser.
So this site gets a big thumbs up from me. Its easy on the eye and hard on the IE.
Posted by Matt King :: August 24th, 2005 at 11:49 AM
#5
I'm really pleased about (and with) the re-design. So what about 1024? Lets face it, how many visitors to ALA are gonna have anything less than 1024? Also, great NON use of fluidy, stretchy, feely (look what I can do!) content column thingy.... that stuff just upsets me :)
PS - Congrats on not swearing John!
Posted by Martin Smith :: August 24th, 2005 at 12:54 PM
#6
@Matt
I've been actively not supporting IE/MAC for some time now. I thought that ALA got the 'go' sign from me :(
Posted by Matt King :: August 24th, 2005 at 02:07 PM
#7
@ Admins:
Had Matt on the brain when I was filling out my comment. Sorry.
Posted by Ryan :: August 24th, 2005 at 02:09 PM
#8
Simply amazing! Love the redesign.
Posted by Bilal :: August 24th, 2005 at 09:49 PM
#9
Really, really nice design. It's not got a massive 'wow-bells-and-whistles-factor', but it doesn't need that. At the end of the day, it is a resource for reading. Also:
'A List Part : For people who make websites'
How many 'people who make websites' do you know who browse at 800 x 600? Exactly. That's why I can't believe it's even been brought up as an issue.
The sites main focus is on textual content, and the typographical consideration and layout that has been applied is damn near faultless - font use, headings, line height, kerning, and use of white space - spot-on.
Personally, from a visual point of view, I do prefer the old design-style with it's slightly raw / retro feel - but that's just my subjective opinion and is, therefore, in no way a criticism of the new design.
Posted by kevadamson :: August 24th, 2005 at 10:36 PM
#10
errr ... upon re-reading the comments, the '800 x 600 thing' hasn't been brought up as an issue - at least not here anyway - so I dunno why I put that! Preempting perhaps, dunno ...
Posted by kevadamson :: August 24th, 2005 at 10:43 PM
#11
I love it! It's just perfect for a website like ALA. The illustrations add to the classy look & feel of the layout, and the nice typography makes it interesting to read and to look at. I think Jason did a great job putting the design tricks in the typography and the colors, instead of the graphics. This way it doesn't get in the way of the content - and it's something not many designers are capable of doing. The 1024 layout is not much of an issue: most of the readers will have 1024+ resolutions anyway, and it's not like 800x600 people aren't able to read the content at all - they just have to scroll sideways to see the sidebar to the right.
Posted by Nick :: August 25th, 2005 at 08:16 AM
#12
Firstly, great site - really like how they've done it - in every way.
Secondly, @ Matt: Why should what ALA design for dictate what you can and can't do? Design for the client or (more ideally) the content.
Posted by Ben Barclay :: August 25th, 2005 at 08:49 AM
#13
If there was a ever a site to deserve a Web Standards Award it's this one. Jason Santa Maria has done an excellent job.
The site is incredibally nice to look at, it feels different to all "the others" and it genuinely does compell me to read EVERYTHING!
A good job all round.
Posted by Tim :: August 25th, 2005 at 08:51 AM
#14
@Ben
Now I never said that ALA's design dictates anything and I certainly wasn't saying that everyone should design their sites like ALA have designed theirs as you seem to be implying.
What I was trying to say is that this site is very influencial for new designers (and the odd old one that's just joining the xhtml/css party). If you look through their articles almost all of them will touch on a hack that you'll need to implement to get your xhtml/css to render correctly in bad browsers including IE/Mac. So the fact that the re-designed ALA ignores IE/Mac sends a message that, for ALA anyway, IE/Mac isn't so important now.
All I'm saying is that I agree with this even though I have always attempted to get my sites to work in it, and maybe I will carry on or not. But there will be a new breed of designers rising up through the ranks that wont bother at all. Much in the same way that I don't bother with Netscape 4. Things move on and it's sites like ALA that will lead these changes, not dictate them.
That's all I was saying. Nothing to do with the design of the site but the build of the css. :-)
Posted by Matt King :: August 25th, 2005 at 09:28 AM
#15
Ha ha that'll get the wingers winging...
Good work to all involved, the new ALA is very nice, its good to see it here
*sarcastic-remark*
Even if it was crap, the names behind it would get it here.
*end-remark*
I'm sure it will be a hot topic for a while to come!
Posted by Nathan :: August 25th, 2005 at 09:35 AM
#16
Hmmm.
I like the direction, but I think the execution lacks in certain areas. I love the tab and logo, and the little issue number sprite is a really nice touch. I like the print-like directions they've taken the design, I really do.
However:
I hate the main navigation -- the type's too big, the rollovers are vile (suffering from the 'done because it can be' disease of bordered link states -- see also every link on the site).
The negative leading used to bring headlines together would be fine if they hadn't used a border underline on hover -- I can only assume the disappearing border on overlapping lines is intentional; it's ugly at best.
The background colour on hover looks sloppy too IMO.
All the dashed lines are very '2003', and you'd never in a million years choose to use them if there wasn't a nice 'dashed' option in the css border property. Done because it can be done and not because it looks good IMO.
On to my major gripe: letterspacing. The author names are too widely letterspaced, and letterspacing the lower case titles is a crime so heinous there is yet to be a word invented for it. The decision not to letterspace the main navigation titles is a poor one, and done only because the type size used is so big. Should be smaller type and more spaing IMO.
If the line-height of the main body text was reduced by 4px or so it'd look a hell of a lot better and read easier -- at the moment the too-wide spacing coupled with the general abundance of white space on the page creates rivers through the page all over the place and the type-colour is just awfully uneven.
It's definitely an improvement on the old site (which I thought was very difficult to use and in which the articles were poorly set), and I like the direction they're taking it, but I think the execution is very sloppy, and many 'features' are clearly done for the sake of doing them.
Posted by Jordan :: August 25th, 2005 at 02:55 PM
#17
Additional:
If anyone wants to see a better exampe of the (design) direction that ALA is headed in -- gorgeously crafted typography, a well-considered and functional layout, and wonderful flourishes and touches everywhere -- see Armin Vit's Speak Up, if you haven't already.
Posted by Jordan :: August 25th, 2005 at 03:02 PM
#18
Hmmm, stripped out the url:
SPEAK UP:
http://www.underconsideration.com/speakup/
Posted by Jordan :: August 25th, 2005 at 03:03 PM
#19
They solved the problem, mostly. Reading Cardwell's links was helpful to better understand the reasoning behind certain solutions (like the text hover states, which Jason basically justified as a personal aesthetic choice).
I agree with Jordon about the kerning or letter-spacing, but on the body copy, not the headlines. It makes for an interesting design element in itself but for long-term readability, which was a stated goal, it's a bit difficult to read.
I disagree with Jordon about Speak Up, which I feel lacks even more of a focus than ALA. ALA's redesign is awfully clean, right to the meat, and flows intuitively. If you want flash and layers of graphics, go somewhere else.
Posted by Trevor :: August 26th, 2005 at 04:05 AM
#20
It is a little American looking for my liking... you guys do type differently...
However in layout terms it is an improvement, and doesn't follow any trends from the past 12 months which is brave (i don't think the text in the top nav should be larger than the article headings though)
Posted by 3stripe :: August 26th, 2005 at 01:57 PM
#21
Great typography, I guess this time they've used books/readable-text standards as well. Black text for reading; Impressive. It really shows how much user-centric and especialy reader-centric the new design is. Did you guys notice the topics section? I love it. The previous design didnt have it.
This redesign did not only consider the interface but a whole lot of importance was given to Information Architecture and a big deal of user experiece considerations. Man it's jus perfect. ALA after all! Congrats ALA. Simple is king!
Posted by M. Saleh. EG :: August 31st, 2005 at 06:57 PM
Comments on: A List Apart