On 2017-05-01 02:17, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote:
https://goo.gl/forms/VDbXIhlFHVM6DleF3
Artwork or not isn't suitable as a yes/no question. Artwork may improve
readability, but it adds to the maintenance burden, so in many cases
it's a trade-off between readability and available resources
Strange argument? Indeed, it is strange that someone would argue that
an increase of 100% in size is negligible. Another thing would be to
argue that bandwidth doesn't matter. It doesn't to you and me, but you
seem to understand that it can matter to some people, right? Because
you didn't say
> Images properly optimized take a negligible amount of space. This one took
> 89.3 KB.
Which is more than 50% of the whole page download.
Negligible, huh?
--
Ubuntu-quality mailing list
Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
Colin Law:
Those of us who pay for bandwidth and/or have to manage with low
connection rates would prefer that images that do not server a purpose
should be avoided.
Images properly optimized take a negligible amount of space. This one
took 89.3 KB.
--
Ubuntu-quality mailing list
On 1 May 2017 at 17:16, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote:
> Gunnar Hjalmarsson:
>> Artwork may improve readability, but it adds to the maintenance
>> burden.
>
> The artwork I'm talking about doesn't require maintenance at all. I'm
> referring to images like the one at the
Gunnar Hjalmarsson:
> Artwork may improve readability, but it adds to the maintenance
> burden.
The artwork I'm talking about doesn't require maintenance at all. I'm
referring to images like the one at the bottom of this page:
(https://wiki.ubuntu.com/es20490446e/Reporting%20bugs)
--
https://goo.gl/forms/VDbXIhlFHVM6DleF3
--
Ubuntu-quality mailing list
Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality