Is there a name for very long scrolling web pages like the Android KitKat page? I am trying to Google for CSS tutorials and other examples, but have no idea what the design is called.
-
mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/os Firefox OS uses a similar design. I wonder what the design is called as well.– SimonTeoOct 8, 2013 at 6:09
-
The signal to noise ratio of that page is awful.– whatsisnameOct 9, 2013 at 3:32
-
@whatsisname I don't disagree, but have seen the pattern show up more and more frequently. Wanted to put a name to it.– ahsteeleOct 9, 2013 at 4:30
4 Answers
These guys call it a layered site or sandwich site:
websites containing clear and concise sections layered on top of each other.
I prefer this term over "Parallax scrolling" since parallax scrolling is more associated with multi-layer horizontal scrolling that creates the illusion of depth to the viewer. (Background moves slower than foreground, it's the same effect when looking out of a car window)
I've heard it referred to as single-page design or a single-page website. For the specific kind you are talking about, I would use the term scrolling single-page website.
References:
When it's the only page on the website - as is the case in the example you mentioned - the term one-pager probably fits best.
As for multi-page websites with long pages, I wouldn't call them anything else than page or long page :)
Parallax Scrolling
Here's a link to some of the great example of Parallax Scrolling websites.
http://www.awwwards.com/30-great-websites-with-parallax-scrolling.html
-
1well, no. parallax scrolling creates the illusion of depth by moving the foreground slower than the background(s), while the Android-Kitkat page is simply scrolling to the different parts on click– LovisOct 8, 2013 at 7:09
-
@DonL. Actually, the android page does use parallax scrolling, although it is more subtle (the doughnuts move slightly, for example).– BrendonOct 8, 2013 at 7:14
-
1@Brendon I think it somehow works similar (with layers), but I wouldn't call it parallax scrolling, since the (at least my) mind is not tricked into the depth-effect. this is - probably - because it's not scrolling horizontallay– LovisOct 8, 2013 at 7:21
-
1to correct my first comment: the background is of course moving slower than the foreground– LovisOct 8, 2013 at 7:38