* markus schnalke <mei...@marmaro.de> [2009-11-06 18:59]: > [2009-11-06 14:57] sta...@cs.tu-berlin.de > > > > Both list navigation part before content [...] > > > or think about embedded devices (zoom in with your css enabled browser > > until you get the right 1/3 of the screen filled with the navigation bar, > > the left 2/3 empty, and you need to scroll 4 pages down to read what euler > > is about). > > Otherwise you need to scroll four pages down to navigate.
No! vim-like G, or <shift-PgDn>, or <ctrl-PgDn>, or simply <End> depending on customisation should be enough to scroll down to 100%. Works for me at least. > > My problem with that is that I don't see why navigation should be > > considered more important than content. > > It's not about importance, but about usability. > > You usually navigate a lot. Not me. Or at least not usually. Of course there are several such pages and use-cases but not the majority. > Especially, through several pages till you > found the right one. Thus you hop from page to page with short times > on the pages. With the navigation at the bottom, each of these stays > becomes longer, because you need to go down first. > > Otherwise, you only need to scroll down to start reading. ... every time you access the page. Yes, it is sort of trade off. > Of course, this my assumptions are only valid if the title and the > first lines of text are in view without scrolling. Means no huge > navigation lists. That's the point -- they *are* usually long. > > > IMO, navigation should take as less real estate as possible [...] > > Seems you usually navigate with your search engine. Well, this might be true ... A well specified search term can save much clicks/keystrokes. Then you depend to certain extend on the search engine and this might suck. -- stanio_
