<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New year, new design.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tatumweb.com/blog/2006/08/06/new-year-new-design/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tatumweb.com/blog/2006/08/06/new-year-new-design/</link>
	<description>Pentecostal Rumination and Review</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2010 06:34:55 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rich</title>
		<link>http://tatumweb.com/blog/2006/08/06/new-year-new-design/comment-page-1/#comment-24449</link>
		<dc:creator>Rich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Aug 2006 23:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tatumweb.com/blog/index.php/2006/08/06/new-year-new-design/#comment-24449</guid>
		<description>Thanks for stopping by and giving me an evaluation, Marc. I appreciate it. By the way, nice redesign on your weblog!

I think my weblog is probably too cluttered, but I feel paranoid about people not being able to discover content they are interested in, so I have so many widgets going on that it may be information overload. I&#039;m not sure. That said, however, usability research does indicate that shorter column width for the content of your page makes it easier to read--not harder. Forcing the eye to travel too far accross the page produces too much eyestrain.

But, then, so does writing too much, which I&#039;m prone to do. Oh well.

Thanks, again.

Rich
&lt;a href=&quot;http://tatumweb.com/blog/&quot;&gt;BlogRodent&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for stopping by and giving me an evaluation, Marc. I appreciate it. By the way, nice redesign on your weblog!</p>
<p>I think my weblog is probably too cluttered, but I feel paranoid about people not being able to discover content they are interested in, so I have so many widgets going on that it may be information overload. I&#8217;m not sure. That said, however, usability research does indicate that shorter column width for the content of your page makes it easier to read&#8211;not harder. Forcing the eye to travel too far accross the page produces too much eyestrain.</p>
<p>But, then, so does writing too much, which I&#8217;m prone to do. Oh well.</p>
<p>Thanks, again.</p>
<p>Rich<br />
<a href="http://tatumweb.com/blog/">BlogRodent</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marc V</title>
		<link>http://tatumweb.com/blog/2006/08/06/new-year-new-design/comment-page-1/#comment-22253</link>
		<dc:creator>Marc V</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2006 16:01:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tatumweb.com/blog/index.php/2006/08/06/new-year-new-design/#comment-22253</guid>
		<description>Looks purty good.  I&#039;m a 2-column man myself.  3 columns tends to make for skinny posts, and some folks don&#039;t like the near-constant scrolling to read a post.  It also limits you if you want to include pictures with a post.

If you have ads and a bunch of items in different categories, then 3 columns helps support all the extra &quot;stuff&quot;.  The red links on blue background stands out well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looks purty good.  I&#8217;m a 2-column man myself.  3 columns tends to make for skinny posts, and some folks don&#8217;t like the near-constant scrolling to read a post.  It also limits you if you want to include pictures with a post.</p>
<p>If you have ads and a bunch of items in different categories, then 3 columns helps support all the extra &#8220;stuff&#8221;.  The red links on blue background stands out well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
