Support for 800X600...
Moderator: General Moderators
I agree. Perhaps I didn't communicate my feelings accurately
What I meant was that when I see a static width site, my initial snap reaction is that it's a cop out. Then conscious thought kicks in and I re-evaluate. It's totally the the client's decision.
Real programmers don't comment their code. If it was hard to write, it should be hard to understand.
Wow popular post. I've decided to appreciate the 1024x768 crowds and give the bones to the 800x600 users. In other words, I support the 800x600 clients so that they could veiw the site but is best presented in a 1024x768 resolution. Smaller resolutions are not supported what-so-ever, my site is not designed for the mobile webers.
Is there ways of checking ones resolution with javascript?
Is there ways of checking ones resolution with javascript?
- RobertGonzalez
- Site Administrator
- Posts: 14293
- Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 6:04 pm
- Location: Fremont, CA, USA
- AKA Panama Jack
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:21 pm
Well, after saying I didn't have time to change my sites from the fixed with of 800, even though I really hate fixed width sites, I took a few minutes to actually fix them.
Both the ADOdb Lite and Template Lite sites are now using the same templates but they are dynamic width. What ever size window you use they format for that window size. Quite frankly they look many times better now. When viewing them with my browser at 1280x1024 the pages look far, far better than before. Those huge bands of empty space on the sides are gone.
The layouts are simple but look so much better as dynamic width.
BTW, I looked at the http://www.clanci.net/ site that was given as an example of why you can't have a dynamic layout without massive alterations. It wouldn't be that hard to change it to a dynamic width site.
Both the ADOdb Lite and Template Lite sites are now using the same templates but they are dynamic width. What ever size window you use they format for that window size. Quite frankly they look many times better now. When viewing them with my browser at 1280x1024 the pages look far, far better than before. Those huge bands of empty space on the sides are gone.
The layouts are simple but look so much better as dynamic width.
BTW, I looked at the http://www.clanci.net/ site that was given as an example of why you can't have a dynamic layout without massive alterations. It wouldn't be that hard to change it to a dynamic width site.
Panama jack, indeed that looks fine. One thing you could do with the header graphic (on template lite site) is use a very big image and let one side flow out of sight when you decrease the window size.
(also, please increase the text size a bit!)
On sites were graphics are only supportive it's very easy to make the site layout fluid. However, I can imagine that that choice is a bit more difficult when you're talking about for example a graphic artists' site or a glossy visual site with lots of high quality images as content.
(also, please increase the text size a bit!)
On sites were graphics are only supportive it's very easy to make the site layout fluid. However, I can imagine that that choice is a bit more difficult when you're talking about for example a graphic artists' site or a glossy visual site with lots of high quality images as content.
- The Phoenix
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 8:12 pm
Many manage the balance between them:matthijs wrote:On sites were graphics are only supportive it's very easy to make the site layout fluid. However, I can imagine that that choice is a bit more difficult when you're talking about for example a graphic artists' site or a glossy visual site with lots of high quality images as content.
http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/171/171.css&page=3
http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/181/181.css&page=2
http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/202/202.css&page=0
Granted, its not a collection of high quality images as content, but they are definitely glossy visual sites by graphic artists. They seem to be fairly fluid.
Uuh Phoenix: if you wanted to show examples of great fluid design why did you pick 3 fixed-width designs??? Ok, the second example has one fluid column, but the columns with imagery are still static...The Phoenix wrote: Many manage the balance between them:
http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/171/171.css&page=3
http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/181/181.css&page=2
http://csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/202/202.css&page=0
Granted, its not a collection of high quality images as content, but they are definitely glossy visual sites by graphic artists. They seem to be fairly fluid.