[ale] OT easy html editor
George Carless
kafka at antichri.st
Tue Jan 24 09:28:37 EST 2006
> > This is never more
> > obvious than being in a school loaded with 800 x 600 monitors trying to
> > view a page written by someone who has a nice, sparkling 19" 1280 x 960
> > monitor and loves to use the full width- "Well, it looks fine on my
> > computer." - while the rest of us are scrolling right to see what was
> > hidden.
>
> This, is a lousy developer. Unless you can code your page so that it
> will be reasonably presented at a minimum of 800x600, as well as your
> 1280x960, you should code for the minimum. I've got a 21 and 22 inch
> monitor side by side, but I still view websites with a browser window
> that's 800x600. I'd say 50% of the websites I view don't fit that size
> window. That's not a problem for me, but what about the girl who's got
> the 14-15 monitor? There are still plenty of them out there. What
> about those mini laptops? Sure some of them will go to 1280x960, but
> then you need a magnifying glass to read the bloody page.
The converse is also true, though: it's a pain in the neck to have a Web
site that loads in what amounts to a small window in the size of a large
screen. There is a debate, generally, between 'fixed' and 'fluid'
designs for the Web - where fluid designs generally resize according to
window size. The problem with these is that from a design perspective
they have their own problems; it's quite difficult for anything but the
most basic task to achieve a design that resizes elegantly to different
screen resolutions etc. but that still follows other design/usability
guidelines such as the number of words on a line, etc. Some developers
go for a hybrid model where certain elements of a page are fixed, while
others are fluid. Until recently I was a staunch advocate of the fluid
width approach, but I've recently found that fixed width designs have a
number of advantages in terms of ease of placement and clarity of design
that in certain cases outweight the disadvantages. As is often the case
with these things, there is a balance to be achieved--a balance that
needs to consider such things as likely audience of the site, etc. And,
to play devil's advocate, there may be a point for many developers where
a decision has to be made as to whom to support: I'm damned if I'm going
to worry about someone who's still at 640x480, for example, and even
800x600 seems rather idiosyncratic in this day and age.
--George
More information about the Ale
mailing list