[thelist] front end design: liquid design
Erika
ekm at seastorm.com
Mon Oct 20 19:46:56 CDT 2008
Judah wrote:
> Under that paradigm it becomes easier for a user to scale your design,
> even fixed width, to the size that "works" for them on their monitor.
That's partly why I asked the question, I guess. I am noticing that
*some* of the browsers don't break web layout when you zoom like they
used to...
I've also noticed sites such as ALA have gone to fixed width... and I
suppose this is the place I should note that my definitions of these
things is pretty rudimentary. When I say "liquid," I'm generally
thinking of flexible-width layout divs and sometimes other elements (I
realize that people have created lots of sub-genres of fluid, and if I'm
not fully up on that, my bad). To my mind, it's a ground rule that most
or all fonts should be resizable.
Fixed-width divs seem to be more appealing to those with print-type
sensibilities, which doesn't necessarily make it more "right" or "wrong."
I like the point Georg made about column-width being an important thing
to consider. (And his detailed notes about how to create a good fluid
design).
What *I* like about fluid design:
1. it reminds me of the old days, before tables were widely used for layout.
2. I find it fun and playful in a way that fixed-width design is not. I
love setting a repeating background on an element and watching it
stretch or shrink depending on how you size the window. It's like a
game of peekaboo. (I need to get a life, I know.)
3. Now that background-attachment works in most browsers, that's kinda
fun to throw in the mix.
Yep. For me, it's all about fun. But when deciding whether to design a
site this way, it's largely about accommodating monitor sizes as well.
I don't think, Joel, that it is "more work" to make a fluid site. It's
just a different approach to design.
I appreciate people's willingness to take on an open ended question and
elaborate. I learn a lot from you.
Erika
More information about the thelist
mailing list