Web Design Theory
In the beginning, there was text. Text ruled, for text was king. Then came the realization of structure and images, and the importance of text diminished slightly. These elements enabled not only graphic interfaces in the network but also the next evolutionary step to availability for all. Then images began to rule. Blinking and flashing, these colorful images were the cornerstone to advertising and were used to “grab” the attention of the users’ eyes.
These were, however, incredibly tacky and hated by nearly everyone, except those who deployed the usage of such vile thing (the ones who never really saw then). And yet, to this day there are emergences of these same vile creations, often still manifestations of advertisements. The general appeal, apparently, is that people as often click to rid themselves of them as they click in interest. But I digress.
The web then moved from simple colors, structure, and design to a more advanced state. New technologies arose that permitted users to not only interact with the web but actually contribute to it, without having to have an immense knowledge in HTML and the backbone languages behind it. And the web developed. Browsers developed enabling spectacular feats. The Internet became as much as a people networking device as a computer networking device. It became a hub for the People. Design flourished.
Web design became a business necessity. Attraction in this day is viewed as important, if not more, than content. Simply put, if the landing page does not attract the eye of the user within a period of time less than a minute, they will leave to another, different site. The content (text) is only second to design. Inevitably, this is the major flaw of the internet of today. While there is nothing wrong with having a visual appealing site (I need a job), many sites get away with only that: no quality in the content. And there are sites with the opposite problem; that is, amazing content with no attraction of the site.
Web design should only be a visual compliment to the content. The visual aspect should provide initial incentive to stay on the site, and from there on out function to: a) emphasize important text/content; b) provide intuitiveness and ease in site navigation; and c) permit pleasant viewing experience while reading (or watching/listening, for that matter) the content. While designs often provide more function than this, these are the essentials for an efficient and effective design.
Web Design Theory, then, is the application of these functional elements. Web design is, in theory, not about competing using the current trends but instead about these functions. A well designed website does not need to remake its image based on the current trends. Take Google, for example. The structure and even logo have changed very little since 1999. Yes, small changes occur throughout time, but redesigning based solely off of trends is expensive, temporary, and impractical. If, however, new concepts of bettering the usage of the site comes with these trends, it is welcomed and accepted in the Web Design Theory, because it serves a purpose to optimize the usage/visibility of the site.
Ideally, every website should have an excellent design. Again, there is no substitute for quality content, but this is not an excuse to have a badly designed website. I would much rather visit a website that is beautifully designed with no valuable content than a website that has neither design nor valuable content.