Notes on Reading the Book
Diagrammatic Writing by Drucker
Link to reading
what the readings complicate about Krug's sense of reading
- the reading states that the title and the words underneath it are different and do not relate to each other. This is the opposite thoughts of Krug.
- The first part is profound, so a similar thought to Krug, but it goes on to say it doesn't hold importance to the rest of the work that follows.
- Parts of the reading aren't suppose to be more primary than others/they should all be treated the same.. different than Krug in terms of the levels of hierarchy and titles.
- Changing of pages show a change of topic and speed as the reading illustrated. (ex. pg. 6).
- Hints that headers don't need a text box (but usually do) because it's a subsidiary role (p.7).
- Agrees with Krug, describes the header as a source of navigation.
- Certain parts are split up to make it seem important and for affect. It is also done to get a point across easier instead of placing it with everything else and making it harder for the reader to understand the main points of the work.
- On pg. 8 with the column formatting, the reading states that the left column gets more attention and that makes sense because Krug stated that readers read from the left to the right naturally.
- On pg. 15, Krug and this reading agree that the change/difference in fonts alter the perception of the importance of the work/information.
- The reading mentioned that links could help readers better understand the meaning/information in a way that the original material cannot.
- This reading stated that statements don't have to follow one enough, but rather struggle to be the most important on the page. Krug, on the other hand, believes that the things that relate to each other should be in the same area.
- Unlike Krug, Drucker doesn't have navigation techniques set up for readers and doesn't really follow the rules that Krug has laid out for readers in his book to follow.
- Drucker's visual argument can be seen where they have columns, saying that both of the sides are fighting for attention. I thought it was interesting that for each column (the left and the right) that there were different definitions/tones of each thing (ex. pg. 14).
- Drucker also claimed that the margins on each side of the main text held the text in place so it wouldn't push outside of it's boundary and I thought that was really interesting because I've never thought of it that way before (p.20).
- Drucker claims indenting something creates power, forcing a hierarchical organization within the work (p.22).
- The reading says that some changes in the format occur for no reason/have no meaning.
- Changing the presentation and format slightly with each page is to make it balanced, according to the reading.
- The presentation can be fluent/distraction/positions of the wording (ex. p.12).
- It bugged me that the headings were a smaller font than the rest of the body text.
- Drucker thinks that readers will get used to the mix of different fonts mixing formats with each other, though I think it just makes the sentences harder to read.
what the articles mean in practice. How might what they argue be taken into web content writing and design?
- For Drucker's reading, I believe that the arguments of writing material and sentences that compete with one another, because I think that the potential outcome of this idea is that the content would be stronger because writers would be trying to look for the best information and ideas.
