[StumpyXL]

1024x768 is standard today. If you really want to know ask if the client would rather have a fixed or a fluid setup.

[adras]

Keep it real at 640x480

[pgo]

Originally Posted by Do Gooder

my face is flexible but has a max width. do i pass?

Yes.

You're lucky we're not talking aesthetics, though.

[Do Gooder]

[bazzle]

This ones a fiery debate.

I'm not a fan of fluid. Fluid sites often screw up a layout by displaying one particular element on the other side of the other with a mass of ugly white space in between.

I also think it's a huge plus being able to take into account how wide lines of text and laying out your site for optimum usability. That all goes out of the window with fluid width.

[Dusteh]

often screw up a layout by displaying one particular element on the other side of the other with a mass of ugly white space in between.

To be fair that would just be due to bad build rather than a flaw of fluid itself, the elements in the page should flow using percentages within the fluid container so that doesn't happen.

[pgo]

Yeah, as has been said several times. That's what max- and min-width are for.

Also, I think herk is referring to elastic layouts - that expand and contract, but are based on font-size (so, sized using ems instead of pixels). Those get crazy with the math, though.

[bazzle]

Originally Posted by pgo

Yeah, as has been said several times. That's what max- and min-width are for.

Also, I think herk is referring to elastic layouts - that expand and contract, but are based on font-size (so, sized using ems instead of pixels). Those get crazy with the math, though.

Like this

陳 Jon Tan

I don't think he was referring to elastic width, as all elastic does is resizes the whole page when you increase/decrease the font size.

As far as I undersatand It doesn't resize with the browser window which is what's being discussed.

To be fair that would just be due to bad build rather than a flaw of fluid itself, the elements in the page should flow using percentages within the fluid container so that doesn't happen.

True, but most sites resize just the main content and the left or right boxes stay the same width. I think the only thing that can be fluid is the main content otherwise the layout screws up.

[Dw Designs]

Im changing my to 810x600

Cause The Banner Ads. And Other Advertisements!

[ravenfire]

Originally Posted by bazzle

True, but most sites resize just the main content and the left or right boxes stay the same width. I think the only thing that can be fluid is the main content otherwise the layout screws up.

I'll admit, I've tried fluid layouts in the past and didn't like it at all. But this method seems very nice (I also didn't know about min/max widths before). The site you link to here does it very well and keeps it subtle which is nice.

[pgo]

That's not his site. Also, it's not a great example. It doesn't take advantage of min- and max-width, so it causes horizontal scroll the larger you make the text.

If you can't make a flexible layout work and remain aesthetically pleasing, it indicates lacking skills on the part of the developer/designer - not a problem with the technology or the user agent.

[ravenfire]

I knew it wasn't his site, I didn't mean to insinuate that it was (that's why I said "the site you link to"). I also didn't mean to insinuate that I thought my inability to create good flexible layouts was a fault of the technology. I fully know that it's a fault of mine. I'm learning though and I'm sure this forum will help tremendously!

Could you give me a couple of good examples of flexible layouts to look at?

[longisland6]

ie6 has some issues with min-width, max-width so you might have to use conditional comments or some javascript to address that.

i also prefer fixed width layouts since it gives better control of your visual layout when you're displaying your data (web content) in a traditional browser. you have much better control of your spatial context, which of course, can help imply meaning.