1. 3
  1.  

  2. 5

    I think it’s funny how they’re giving the example based on a website that simply wastes about 25% of the screen on navigation that’ll be rarely used if the person came to the site to interact with the actual content of the page instead (you know, that thing we actually go to the websites for).

    Sure, you can use this to illustrate the concept, but to use gigantic yet empty top and bottom navigation bars on a single page, wasting 30% of the screen in the end after doing an extra padding adjustment on the bottom bar that’s mostly empty anyways, without a clear disclaimer that doing such persistent bars is a very bad practice (in landscape, no less), is not doing the web community any good.

    One could argue that folks reading the article should know better; but the state of the web today would indicate 30% of wasted screen space is rather modest by today’s “standards”, so, perhaps the battle is already lost…