IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New If your design is good it won't matter much
I often find the reverse problem. My parents run at 800x600 with large fonts. There are a lot of web sights that assume there is at least 1024x768 and cram in horribly at that size.

A good design should be flexible enough to work over a large range* of sizes. If you do it right, your site should be OK at anything from 800x600 to 2400x1800.

The problem is that a lot of web designers came from a traditional paper graphic design background. They are used to designing for a fixed page size, and adjusting to flexible sizes eludes them.

That is how you end up seeing sites using advanced CSS to control layout and size but just use that to fix the pixel placement of fonts and graphics.

The one I find amusing is sites that specify fonts by name, but it's actually some purchased art font.

Jay

* I'm not one of the CSS design fanatics that thinks you can design one page to look the perfect on everything from hand held phones to high resolution multi-screen configurations.
New I made a good example...
www.gregfolkert.net

It works from ~ 300 pixels wide to as wide as you can go.

I dunno.
--
[link|mailto:greg@gregfolkert.net|greg],
[link|http://www.iwethey.org/ed_curry|REMEMBER ED CURRY!] @ iwethey
PGP key: 1024D/B524687C 2003-08-05
Fingerprint: E1D3 E3D7 5850 957E FED0  2B3A ED66 6971 B524 687C
Alternate Fingerprint: 09F9 1102 9D74  E35B D841 56C5 6356 88C0
Alternate Fingerprint: 455F E104 22CA  29C4 933F 9505 2B79 2AB2
New Even within a site, it can be a problem.
E.g. Settings that render the Washington Post's [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/?nav=globaltop&reload=true|front page] well for me with FF at 2048x1536 yield giant fonts when looking at [link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2007/06/06/BL2007060601288.html|Froomkin's Blog]. It would be nice is giant sites like that were consistent.

Cheers,
Scott.
(Who doesn't want to write his own CSS for WP just yet.)
New Not a difficult technical problem
if you use % instead of fixed pixel sizes for tables or frames (or fancy scripted equivalents)
there is no problem


A
Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]
New You misunderstand pixels

They are a relative unit. The fact that IE can't scale them is its own damn fault.

--\r\nYou cooin' with my bird?
New I don't understand
MSNBC has plenty of white space in Firefox

A
Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://westcottradio.org|Tune In]
Expand Edited by andread June 9, 2007, 11:19:38 PM EDT
     White Space Hell - (andread) - (9)
         Unfortunately - (ubernostrum) - (8)
             If your design is good it won't matter much - (JayMehaffey) - (5)
                 I made a good example... - (folkert)
                 Even within a site, it can be a problem. - (Another Scott)
                 Not a difficult technical problem - (andread) - (2)
                     You misunderstand pixels - (ubernostrum) - (1)
                         I don't understand - (andread)
             I run at 1920x1200 - (pwhysall) - (1)
                 /me laughs at your tiny screen. -NT - (Another Scott)

Loopholes and fine print are there for a reason, and it's not to make you happy.
60 ms