That's an example of a bad center aligned site. Nothing has been done with the left or right white-space and it just looks bad.Toneboy wrote:Here's a better example of central alignment:
ebay.co.uk
Page layout - align left or align center?
Moderator: General Moderators
Toneboy wrote:As an 800 x 600 display user I appreciate that your site loads for me in a central table 700 pixels wide.
(Don't like 1024 x 768 myself, just a matter of what I'm used to)
I guess there's still the option of having two versions of a site, one for low-res and one for high-res. A simple bit of javascript could be used to detect the screen resolution.
With PHP this wouldn't be too much of a problem either, you could simply have a session variable that holds the 'low' or 'high' res state and display/remove bits of the site depending on the value, so you would essentially have one site which modifies itself to fit the screen size.
- twigletmac
- Her Royal Site Adminness
- Posts: 5371
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:21 am
- Location: Essex, UK
Please remember that people don't necessarily use lower resolutions in order to be difficult. Amazingly not everybody has perfect eyesight and some have to have their resolutions set low simply to be able to read what's on the screen. Accessibility and liquid layouts can make the web a better place for everyone - the web is not print, you can't make sites that look exactly the same for everyone.
I've done a lot of work making web sites accessible and it's really frustrating to constantly hear the same old arguments about - people on low resolutions can just lump it, if they can't use javascript I don't care, it looks good on my computer/browser/resolution everyone should use that...
BTW, the latest web statistics I saw still show a fairly even split between 800x600 and 1024x768 - do you really want to alienate (and horizontal (edit: :oop:) scrollbars do alienate) 50% of your possible audience?
And why oh why would you ever want to code different versions of your site for different resolutions, percentage widths just do a much better job and allow people to pick the resolution and browser window size that suits them - not you.
Mac
I've done a lot of work making web sites accessible and it's really frustrating to constantly hear the same old arguments about - people on low resolutions can just lump it, if they can't use javascript I don't care, it looks good on my computer/browser/resolution everyone should use that...
BTW, the latest web statistics I saw still show a fairly even split between 800x600 and 1024x768 - do you really want to alienate (and horizontal (edit: :oop:) scrollbars do alienate) 50% of your possible audience?
And why oh why would you ever want to code different versions of your site for different resolutions, percentage widths just do a much better job and allow people to pick the resolution and browser window size that suits them - not you.
Mac
Last edited by twigletmac on Thu Nov 13, 2003 5:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Toneboy
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2002 5:59 am
- Location: Law, Scotland.
- Contact:
That's the reason I stick to 800 x 600. I find most types too small in 1024 x 768. (No, I'm not going to the opticians though!)twigletmac wrote:Please remember that people don't necessarily use lower resolutions in order to be difficult. Amazingly not everybody has perfect eyesight and some have to have their resolutions set low simply to be able to read what's on the screen. Accessibility and liquid layouts can make the web a better place for everyone - the web is not print, you can't make sites that look exactly the same for everyone.
As a thought, is there a way to determine screen width from the server side?twigletmac wrote:I've done a lot of work making web sites accessible and it's really frustrating to constantly hear the same old arguments about - people on low resolutions can just lump it, if they can't use javascript I don't care, it looks good on my computer/browser/resolution everyone should use that...
Speaking as a web user (not part-time designer) I don't find vertical scroll bars a problem. Horizontal scroll bars are an entirely different matter though. [Edit by Mac - I don't think I was quite awake when I posted thattwigletmac wrote:BTW, the latest web statistics I saw still show a fairly even split between 800x600 and 1024x768 - do you really want to alienate (and horizontal scrollbars do alienate) 50% of your possible audience?
I wouldn't want to code different versions. But I'm thinking of doing something with size width because I'm aware that at the moment using a size fixed by myself leaves things "hanging" (if you see the trulybizarre.co.uk home page you'll see what I mean from the menu bar on the left hand side - I'd prefer to make that fit more neatly to a user's left hand side of a screen).twigletmac wrote:And why oh why would you ever want to code different versions of your site for different resolutions, percentage widths just do a much better job and allow people to pick the resolution and browser window size that suits them - not you.
Mac
I would personally prefer to avoid using percentages - as someone who doesn't always have his browser window maximised I see what using percentages can do to your formatting.
- Toneboy
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2002 5:59 am
- Location: Law, Scotland.
- Contact:
Very ropey trial code:
Code: Select all
<?php
session_start()
// Script to determine pagewidth
if (!$pagewidth) {
//how to set $pagewidth
<script language="JavaScript1.2">
<!--
if (screen.width==640||screen.height==480) //if 640x480
{
// set page width to 640
<?
$pagewidth="640";
session_register("pagewidth");
?>
}
else if (screen.width==800||screen.height==600) //if 800x600
{
// set page width to 800
<?
$pagewidth="800";
session_register("pagewidth");
?>
}
else if (screen.width==1024||screen.height==768) //if 1024x768
{
// set page width to 1024
<?
$pagewidth="1024";
session_register("pagewidth");
?>
}
else if (screen.width==1280||screen.height==1024) //if 1280x1024
{
// set page width to 1280
<?
$pagewidth="1280";
session_register("pagewidth");
?>
}
else
{
// set page width to other value, for sake of example, 700
<?
$pagewidth="700";
session_register("pagewidth");
?>
}
//-->
</script>
}
?>
<html>
<head>
<title>Pagewidth test</title>
</head>
<body>
<table width="<?=$pagewidth;?>" align="center">
<tr><td>
Your pagewidth is <?=$pagewidth;?>
</td></tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>Ooops... that's got me going......twigletmac wrote:I've done a lot of work making web sites accessible and it's really frustrating to constantly hear the same old arguments about - people on low resolutions can just lump it, if they can't use javascript I don't care, it looks good on my computer/browser/resolution everyone should use that...
I guess it's just down to what sort of website you're creating and who your target user group is. Trying to design a website which is accessible for everyone is very 'PC' and worthy of a Blue Peter badge but in mose cases is, in my opion, futile.
It's like trying to build every house, office block, and skyscraper with ramps instead of stairs just to make them accessible for people with disabilities. Don't get me wrong I have nothing against this at all, but in this day and age it's just not going to happen, people want to move forward with technology not be held back because some people can not take advantage of it.
"A disadvantage or deficiency, especially a physical or mental impairment that interferes with or prevents normal achievement in a particular area."
The world isn't a sugar coated ball of fluffy cotten wool, not everyone is as equal as the next, and pigs do not fly.
If I design a site for a 1024x768 display and it requires JavaScript to be enabled then tough luck if you can't access it. Why should I, or anyone else for that matter, have to restrict ourselfs from creating what we want just to please people that need each letter of text to be half the size of the screen in order to read it.
This site even uses JavaScript!
It doesn't bother me in the slightest that some people may not be able to access the 'hi-res' sites I create. The people that matter can access them and as far as I'm concerned that's all that does matter.
- twigletmac
- Her Royal Site Adminness
- Posts: 5371
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:21 am
- Location: Essex, UK
Even very techy people can have poor eyesight - but of course if your target user group is anybody who doesn't deviate from the norm...gen-ik wrote:I guess it's just down to what sort of website you're creating and who your target user group is.
Accessible does not mean "must look exactly the same", sometimes certain things can't be made accessible directly, e.g. a movie, but it is entirely possible to provide a transcript. Images are a good example - do you bother with alt text or do you consider that too PC and futile?gen-ik wrote:Trying to design a website which is accessible for everyone is very 'PC' and worthy of a Blue Peter badge but in mose cases is, in my opion, futile.
To be fair that's not a very well thought through analogy. It's like ensuring that houses, office blocks and skyscrapers are accessible - with lifts, ramps to entrances and stairs as well.gen-ik wrote:It's like trying to build every house, office block, and skyscraper with ramps instead of stairs just to make them accessible for people with disabilities.
In this day and age there is legislation which says (in the UK at least and I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't exist in some form in most techy countries) that all reasonable effort must be made to make web sites accessible - i.e. it's the law.gen-ik wrote: Don't get me wrong I have nothing against this at all, but in this day and age it's just not going to happen.
Does that really prevent you from making the information available in another form? No, but for a lot of people that's far to much effort and that's discrimination.gen-ik wrote:people want to move forward with technology not be held back because some people can not take advantage of it
Your point? How does this prove that discrimination is fair?gen-ik wrote:"A disadvantage or deficiency, especially a physical or mental impairment that interferes with or prevents normal achievement in a particular area."
So discrimination is fair?gen-ik wrote:The world isn't a sugar coated ball of fluffy cotten wool, not everyone is as equal as the next, and pigs do not fly.
The web has an amazing ability to make it possible for people of a wide range of abilities to access information - opinions like this hold it back. But then it's your audience you're limiting, just remember someone could sue you for it one day. You may not think that's fair but it is right.gen-ik wrote:If I design a site for a 1024x768 display and it requires JavaScript to be enabled then tough luck if you can't access it. Why should I, or anyone else for that matter, have to restrict ourselfs from creating what we want just to please people that need each letter of text to be half the size of the screen in order to read it.
Not for anything intergral.gen-ik wrote:This site even uses JavaScript!
So anybody differently abled doesn't matter, that's a really nice statement. Of course as I've already stated, the law does disagree with you and by definition purposefully putting no effort into making your site accessible is in fact illegal in this country (UK). Get over it.gen-ik wrote:It doesn't bother me in the slightest that some people may not be able to access the 'hi-res' sites I create. The people that matter can access them and as far as I'm concerned that's all that does matter.
Mac
Yes I do use alt text, and XHTML also requires it to be present on all image tags.twigletmac wrote:do you bother with alt text or do you consider that too PC and futile?
It's the law for all Taxi Cabs in the UK to carry a bail of hay around with them as well (fact). I've never heard of anyone being sued for 'not making all reasonale effort' to make their website accessible, and I don't think it's anything to worry about really.twigletmac wrote:In this day and age there is legislation which says (in the UK at least and I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't exist in some form in most techy countries) that all reasonable effort must be made to make web sites accessible - i.e. it's the law.
Discimination? Are Radio stations discriminating against deaf people? Are car manfacturers discriminating against the blind?twigletmac wrote:Does that really prevent you from making the information available in another form? No, but for a lot of people that's far to much effort and that's discrimination.
A line has to be drawn somewhere.
I didn't say discrimination was fair but people can take things too far in the 'equal rights' direction... I won't mention any names. Some people think that calling coffee white or black is racist.twigletmac wrote:Your point? How does this prove that discrimination is fair?
The law is in place to keep people like yourself happy. I rent space for my websites therefore I can do what I like, within reason, with that webspace. The host is also based in the USA so UK laws have no power there.twigletmac wrote:the law does disagree with you and by definition purposefully putting no effort into making your site accessible is in fact illegal in this country (UK). Get over it.
Like I said people can take things too far. Maybe I should write to the Government and demand that all news papers and magazines should be in braile as well as printed text?
I don't disagree with your points of view I just think that people should be free to create websites how they see fit. Some people want the right to be able to read and access websites, others want creative freedom.
It's an on going battle that no one is ever likely to win.
I tend to use 2 div's...not exactly like this, since i use css, but this gives you an idea
The page isnt always 500 pixels wide, but, the text remains left justified while the overall page or text is center, cutting all that white space (for people in higher resolutions) effectively in half, which looks a lot better, while it's still functional in 800x600...
...other than that, I can be one of those bastards that uses frames to get everything to look good in any resolution - with enough work, it can really work out well...
Code: Select all
<div width="100%" align="center">
<div width="500">
Blah blah blah
</div>
</div>...other than that, I can be one of those bastards that uses frames to get everything to look good in any resolution - with enough work, it can really work out well...
- twigletmac
- Her Royal Site Adminness
- Posts: 5371
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:21 am
- Location: Essex, UK
Gen-ik: I wrote a long rebuttal but then realised it was wasted on you, hopefully other forum members aren't so (metaphorically) short-sighted but I doubt you'll ever understand the issues until you experience them yourself. I hope for your sake you don't have to have the experience to actually start thinking about the issues in a less ignorant, biased way.
One point, this being the web - can you tell me how able-bodied I am? Would you temper your arguments if you actually had to deal with one of the people that to you 'do not matter'?
Apologies to others for the personal comments, I appreciate they would in some ways be better directed via PM, but there are some arguments I believe are well served in public. I do get fairly riled by those who don't understand why accessibility is important and why it doesn't mean being PC or having 'boring' web sites. After all, you do have to balance the needs of the few against the needs of the many.
Mac
One point, this being the web - can you tell me how able-bodied I am? Would you temper your arguments if you actually had to deal with one of the people that to you 'do not matter'?
Apologies to others for the personal comments, I appreciate they would in some ways be better directed via PM, but there are some arguments I believe are well served in public. I do get fairly riled by those who don't understand why accessibility is important and why it doesn't mean being PC or having 'boring' web sites. After all, you do have to balance the needs of the few against the needs of the many.
Mac
Last edited by twigletmac on Fri Nov 14, 2003 6:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
Haha. This honestly made me laugh. I am actually short-sighted. Got the specs to prove it.twigletmac wrote:hopefully other forum members aren't so (metaphorically) short-sighted
This is true. For now though, and hopefully until I pop-my-clogs, I am able-bodied and wouldn't want it any other way.twigletmac wrote:I doubt you'll ever understand the issues until you experience them yourself
Same here, but I wouldn't go as far as to say my points of view on this matter were biased or ignorant. I'm simply saying that if I design a (non-commercial) website then I should be able to designing it as I please. If I designed a website in a more commercial way then yes I would take other considerations aboard.twigletmac wrote:I hope for your sake you don't have to have the experience to actually start thinking about the issues in a less ignorant, biased way
No, I'm short-sightedtwigletmac wrote:One point, this being the web - can you tell me how able-bodied I am?
Honestly? No. Not really. Having a point of view on something or argument about/against something is just that. Maybe talking about this kind of thing on-line and not face to face makes it a less personal experience, and I might change some points of view if I were to discuss it face-to-face, but creative and artist freedom itself is a valid personal right which I imagine you do not totally disagree with... even if it is in the world of website design and creation.twigletmac wrote:Would you temper your arguments if you actually had to deal with one of the people that to you 'do not matter'?
I'm also not saying that disabled people 'do no matter' but as cruel as it may sound I am not worried if someone can not view or access some of my websites due to their disability. Not in a "I really do not give a toss about them" way but more in a "you do not have a license to drive therefor do not expect to be able to drive" type of way... hopefully that doesn't sound too discriminating, it's not supposed to be.
Peace.
-
ihateevilbill
- Forum Commoner
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 5:57 am
-
ihateevilbill
- Forum Commoner
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 5:57 am
