Space or density, not both
Commit to generous space or tight density, never the middle.
From frontend-design, Spatial Composition: space OR density.
The undecided middle
Drag toward dense and watch the middle band fail.
Generous spaceCommitted
Field Supply
padding
–
gap –
columns –
in view –
empty –
.shop[data-density="generous"] { --pad: clamp(24px, 11vw, 160px); --gap: 64px; }
.shop[data-density="dense"] { --pad: 12px; --gap: 8px; }
Two right answers, swapped
Swap spacing, then scroll both previews.
Luxury · generousGood
empty
–Ops · denseGood
Open$84.2k
Overdue$12.9k
DSO38d
Paid 30d$61.0k
| Invoice | Client | Due | Amount |
|---|
rows in view
–.brand-page { --pad: clamp(24px, 9vw, 96px); --gap: 56px; }
.dashboard { --pad: 10px; --gap: 6px; --row: 26px; }
Dense is not cramped
Sort by amount, then turn on the row guides.
Unsorted
Cramped: no systemBad
padding: 3px 5px / 7px 2px / 5px 9pxControlled: on a gridGood
height: 28px; padding: 0 8px.table td { height: 28px; padding: 0 8px; }
.table .num { text-align: right; font-variant-numeric: tabular-nums; }
Why it matters, pros and cons
Why it matters
The middle is too loose to compare and too tight to feel considered.
Pros
- Page purpose reads at a glance
- Off-scale values stand out in review
- Dense views fit a whole decision
Cons
- Generous space costs scrolling on data-heavy screens
- Density without alignment reads as cramped
- Mixed products need two systems, one per surface