Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Feedback and Testing › Forum Help and Feedback › Feedback Archive (Closed Issues) › Kudos on the new look of the "Quote" feature!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Kudos on the new look of the "Quote" feature! - Page 2

post #31 of 39
8/31/05 at 6:44pm
Well if you're not going to italicize it No.6 I'd go with Nils idea and shrink the font down a tad, so at least the wording would look stylistically different from the rest of the post and still be perfectly readable.
Reply
post #32 of 39
8/31/05 at 6:59pm
My work system is pretty generic IE6 on a 17" monitor running 1024 x 768 and fonts set to medium, which I was using earlier.

Now at home, I'm using FireFox on a 17" monitor at 1600 x 1200. Things look a bit different (don't know if the box was tweaked further). But now I prefer Nils' smaller font suggestion. It's perfectly legible while reducing the footprint.
Reply
post #33 of 39
9/1/05 at 10:02am
Ok....the font size is now 1. Let's see how that goes over.

I added the bold back in because the font size of 1 was to hard to read.
Reply
post #34 of 39
9/1/05 at 12:16pm
Quote:
Testing to see how quote's within quotes now look...


Now I understand how matte framing of paintings work!

Quote:
Quote:
: laugh:
Reply
post #35 of 39
9/1/05 at 3:39pm
Here's a random quote from the "Katrina" thread...
Quote:
New Orleans has always had a complicated relationship with the water surrounding it. Everyone told the first settlers this was the wrong place to build a city. It is wedged precariously between the mighty Mississippi and Lake Pontchartrain, and most of it was once swampland. Aggravating the problem is the fact that much of New Orleans is below sea level, so that after a good rain, the water just settles in. There is now a decent pumping system, which helps. Old-timers, however, still talk of the days when, after a bad storm, bodies washed out of the cemeteries.

What is threatening New Orleans is a combination of two man-made problems: more levees and fewer wetlands. The levees installed along the Mississippi to protect the city from water surges have had a perverse effect: they have actually made it more vulnerable to flooding. That's because New Orleans has been kept in place by the precarious balance of two opposing forces. Because the city is constructed on 100 feet of soft silt, sand and clay, it naturally "subsides," or sinks, several feet a century. Historically, that subsidence has been counteracted by sedimentation: new silt, sand and clay that are deposited when the river floods. But since the levees went up—mostly after the great flood of 1927—the river has not been flooding, and sedimentation has stopped.

The upshot is that New Orleans has been sinking as much as 3 ft. a century. That's bad news for a city that is already an average of 8 ft. below sea level. Making things worse: sea levels worldwide are rising as much as 3 ft. a century on account of global warming. The lower New Orleans plunges, the worse it will be when the big one hits.


I gotta tell you, this causes eye strain for me. My immediate reaction will be ignoring quotes. I hate to do that.
Reply
post #36 of 39
9/1/05 at 6:23pm
Thread Starter 
For comparison purposes:
New Orleans has always had a complicated relationship with the water surrounding it. Everyone told the first settlers this was the wrong place to build a city. It is wedged precariously between the mighty Mississippi and Lake Pontchartrain, and most of it was once swampland. Aggravating the problem is the fact that much of New Orleans is below sea level, so that after a good rain, the water just settles in. There is now a decent pumping system, which helps. Old-timers, however, still talk of the days when, after a bad storm, bodies washed out of the cemeteries.

What is threatening New Orleans is a combination of two man-made problems: more levees and fewer wetlands. The levees installed along the Mississippi to protect the city from water surges have had a perverse effect: they have actually made it more vulnerable to flooding. That's because New Orleans has been kept in place by the precarious balance of two opposing forces. Because the city is constructed on 100 feet of soft silt, sand and clay, it naturally "subsides," or sinks, several feet a century. Historically, that subsidence has been counteracted by sedimentation: new silt, sand and clay that are deposited when the river floods. But since the levees went up—mostly after the great flood of 1927—the river has not been flooding, and sedimentation has stopped.

The upshot is that New Orleans has been sinking as much as 3 ft. a century. That's bad news for a city that is already an average of 8 ft. below sea level. Making things worse: sea levels worldwide are rising as much as 3 ft. a century on account of global warming. The lower New Orleans plunges, the worse it will be when the big one hits.
I have to agree, the bold, especially with full paragraphs of text looks almost like solid black lines. The other problem with using bold and/or italics is you wont be able to carry over the bold or italic words included in the quote itself.

At least the 1pt typeface does cut down a good deal on space, and keeps the primary focus on the response rather than the quote.
Reply
post #37 of 39
9/1/05 at 7:56pm
I think I agree the small font without the bold is the way to go. I like economizing on space with the smaller font a lot.
Reply
post #38 of 39
9/1/05 at 10:43pm
Ok....back to no bold.

I am going to leave it as is for know with no further changes. Thanks for all the suggestions.

Parker
Reply
post #39 of 39
9/3/05 at 9:13am
Nils,

I agree with you that large blocks of text in a quote box can be very difficult to read in a small typeface, either bold or not. However, I also find it much clearer (both visually and content-wise) when quotes consist of small snippets of previously written text rather than a large block. The latter smacks of a lot of e-mail (ab)users who tend to quote everything that was previously mentioned in a thread to add a one line response.

In my opinion breaking the quoted passage into concise, relevant sections is not only easier on the eye but also easier to follow. So if members use quotes judiciously (and efficiently) I don't think the legibility issue will be a major concern.

My two cents.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Feedback and Testing › Forum Help and Feedback › Feedback Archive (Closed Issues) › Kudos on the new look of the "Quote" feature!