Pretty neat reading about hovercrafts, but I fail to see why the hovercrafts time is now? It's more efficient, it's less noisy, but surely that's a case of gradual progress that has always been...
Pretty neat reading about hovercrafts, but I fail to see why the hovercrafts time is now? It's more efficient, it's less noisy, but surely that's a case of gradual progress that has always been happening through time? What's specific about right now?
I feel the headline makes sense if you add "...says company who makes hovercrafts and runs a hovercraft ferry service". The article says "The global rise in sea levels, and the blurring of the...
I feel the headline makes sense if you add "...says company who makes hovercrafts and runs a hovercraft ferry service".
The article says "The global rise in sea levels, and the blurring of the boundary between land and sea that will result, is set to grow its niche further."
Off topic so please label as such, but can sombody please tell me what the giant quotes in articles are about? I know it's nothing new, but I see it in articles all the time and I really hate it....
Off topic so please label as such, but can sombody please tell me what the giant quotes in articles are about? I know it's nothing new, but I see it in articles all the time and I really hate it. They're often out of context, not particularly interesting quotes that really pull you out of the article, this effect is compounded by the fact that you then read the same quote again 30 seconds later. They're used a lot so they must have a purpose, but does anyone actually like these??
Edit: They're called pull quotes and Wikipedia says this about them:
A disadvantage of pull quotes as a design element is that they can disrupt the reading process of readers invested in reading the text sequentially by drawing attention to ghost fragments out of context. At the other extreme, when pull quotes are used to break up what would otherwise be a formless wall of text, they can serve as visual landmarks to help the reader maintain a sense of sequence and place.
So I guess I'm not the only one who doesn't like them but I'm curious to see what other people's opinions of them, specifically in this article are
Pull quotes also drive me nuts. In their best usage, I’ve seen them used as essentially section headers, which only works when the text can be logically broken up into narrative sections, _and _...
Pull quotes also drive me nuts. In their best usage, I’ve seen them used as essentially section headers, which only works when the text can be logically broken up into narrative sections, _and _ the author puts a considerable amount of time into choosing a quote that meaningfully represents the section.
I actually had to implement pull quotes at the New York Times (at the time I’m pretty sure they were only used for the magazine, though, were just used the same tool for producing the magazine and the paper), and I remember being pretty disappointed by it, but they also seemed to have a power different understanding of what pull quotes were for. The pull quote block we implemented was specifically for pulling focus to a quote from a person, and included the author’s name, which I suspect could create a different utility than how they’re commonly used. I can’t even remember the last time I read a piece and didn’t find them distracting; I often find myself actively skipping them/avoiding reading them so that they don’t break my flow.
Pull quotes are sometimes not meant to improve the experience of the reader, but rather for a potential reader to get acquainted with the material and decide if they're going to read the whole...
Pull quotes are sometimes not meant to improve the experience of the reader, but rather for a potential reader to get acquainted with the material and decide if they're going to read the whole thing.
When correctly selected, they can anchor the reading and improve comprehension so you know what are the main points or takeaways.
However, that is a custom originated in print, so it is quite possible for a website to be better served by other comprehension helpers.
My teacher in school taught me to read all these extra bits first, and my mother (a journalist) did the same.
Pretty neat reading about hovercrafts, but I fail to see why the hovercrafts time is now? It's more efficient, it's less noisy, but surely that's a case of gradual progress that has always been happening through time? What's specific about right now?
I feel the headline makes sense if you add "...says company who makes hovercrafts and runs a hovercraft ferry service".
The article says "The global rise in sea levels, and the blurring of the boundary between land and sea that will result, is set to grow its niche further."
Off topic so please label as such, but can sombody please tell me what the giant quotes in articles are about? I know it's nothing new, but I see it in articles all the time and I really hate it. They're often out of context, not particularly interesting quotes that really pull you out of the article, this effect is compounded by the fact that you then read the same quote again 30 seconds later. They're used a lot so they must have a purpose, but does anyone actually like these??
Edit: They're called pull quotes and Wikipedia says this about them:
So I guess I'm not the only one who doesn't like them but I'm curious to see what other people's opinions of them, specifically in this article are
Pull quotes also drive me nuts. In their best usage, I’ve seen them used as essentially section headers, which only works when the text can be logically broken up into narrative sections, _and _ the author puts a considerable amount of time into choosing a quote that meaningfully represents the section.
I actually had to implement pull quotes at the New York Times (at the time I’m pretty sure they were only used for the magazine, though, were just used the same tool for producing the magazine and the paper), and I remember being pretty disappointed by it, but they also seemed to have a power different understanding of what pull quotes were for. The pull quote block we implemented was specifically for pulling focus to a quote from a person, and included the author’s name, which I suspect could create a different utility than how they’re commonly used. I can’t even remember the last time I read a piece and didn’t find them distracting; I often find myself actively skipping them/avoiding reading them so that they don’t break my flow.
Pull quotes are sometimes not meant to improve the experience of the reader, but rather for a potential reader to get acquainted with the material and decide if they're going to read the whole thing.
When correctly selected, they can anchor the reading and improve comprehension so you know what are the main points or takeaways.
However, that is a custom originated in print, so it is quite possible for a website to be better served by other comprehension helpers.
My teacher in school taught me to read all these extra bits first, and my mother (a journalist) did the same.