|
|
|
|
|
by eropple
2347 days ago
|
|
"Significantly worse"? Just getting away from a serif font makes the third you linked way better to me. The text contrast is still good (to head off the "but it's not pure black on white!" cargo cult) and colored headers are distinctive but not obnoxious. |
|
The original one doesn't use CSS at all (and doesn't set fonts with serifs), while all the others try to alter fonts and/or their sizes, potentially changing them from ones set/preferred by a user to ones set by a webmaster. thebestmotherfucking.website also tries to override colors. I think these are good (simple, hence easy to reason about) examples of the awkwardness that comes out of styling (and complexity of relatively simple decisions): some would assume certain user agents and settings, and possibly that users don't configure those. Not to mention that some may actually prefer serifs and other common defaults.
Would be amusing if that progression of websites grew even further, to heavy and heavily styled SPAs, completely reversing the original message.