TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:White space is a good thing! From:Geoff Hart <Geoff-h -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA> Date:Tue, 27 Jul 1999 08:48:48 -0400
Bev Lockhart observes: <<They changed the rules in between
the time I was a newspaper editor and became a technical
editor. White space USED to be considered a good thing.>>
White space _still is_ considered a good thing, at least in any
field where the designers give a damn about making life easy
for the readers. (That statement rules out a whole generation
of "grunge" designers and self-appointed authorities who
have never bothered keeping up with the research, but
hopefully includes most technical communicators.)
The problem with your question is that you haven't defined
what you mean by white space: this term includes wasted
space, gratuituous space, accidental space, and carefully
chosen space that reflects both the principles of aesthetic
design and the principles of cognitive psychology. The latter
type of white space is good; the others are generally
indefensible. Which type were you talking about?
<<Who are the doc design gurus, and how did they decide
upon "the rules"?>>
There are many and varied gurus. Some (e.g., Karen
Schriver) have spent years doing careful studies and learning
the literature of cognitive psych; others (e.g., Roger Parker,
John McWade) have classical training in design, and a
seemingly instinctive grasp of both aesthetics and functional
design; still others apparently have shallow design training
but consider their personal tastes far more important than any
objective considerations (the folks who designed the early
issues of _Wired_ come to mind, as do a few others currently
protected from being named by libel laws). How well these
"rules" spread through a particular design community
depends on how good a salesman the gurus are or how
convincing their arguments are.