london.pm.org web site - facelifted (v2)

[Paul Makepeace]

On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Andy Wardley <abw at wardley.org> wrote:
> Nigel Rantor wrote:
>>
>> I've already poked Andy about this when he put up the initial version.
>
> Here's my reply to Nigel, for the benefit of anyone else interested.
>
> <reply>
>
> Yes.  I've always been a fluid-layout kinda guy.  800x600 is annoyingly
> narrow when you've got a large monitor, so a fluid layout was a big win when
> you had to assume a minimum width of 800px.
>
> But these days, it's considered "officially" OK to assume that 1024x768 is
> the lowest common denominator for screen width, which gives you a nicely
> sized

I'd aim for 950-ish width - not much of a sacrifice from 1024 - that
way you can fit a couple of them side by side on 1920x monitors, which
are pretty affordable and commonplace these days.

Also *requiring* 1024 or near it doesn't leave people the scope to
have a bit of space around the browser to bring other windows up,
click on the desktop, taskbar/dock etc. etc.

Good stuff tho, big improvement!

P

> bit of content-space to play with.  Making it fluid upwards of that tends to
> result in wide wide columns that are hard to read.  So although I used to be
> staunchly anti-fixed width, I guess I've now been swayed towards them.
>
> Making it fluid might be a bit tricky, but probably do-able.  I'll have a
> think about it.
>
> </reply>
>
> I did have a play with it, but it was hard to make it look half-decent with
> the non-repeating header.  So it was a case of junking the header (which
> I really liked) or spending a lot of time creating separate layers and
> building up a sliding doors effect.  That would have been really nice if I
> could have got the parallax effect to work (like on badgerpower.com - resize
> the window and watch the clouds), but I couldn't.  At least not in the time
> I had.
>
> Anyway, the site *does* have both fixed and fluid layouts.  It's just that
> the fluid layout doesn't have the non-repeating header or the sidebars.  :-)
>
> A
>