[thelist] Layout Stability

DAVOUD TOHIDY dtohidy at hotmail.com
Sat Nov 10 07:58:18 CST 2007

> Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 16:20:30 -0500 Felix Miata wrote:
> "Nothing wrong" is merely your opinion, not a fact.
> The fact is you are bastardizing an inherently adaptive...
> Just check the manufacturers' web sites for current models...
>Screen resolution is merely one of the variables that need 
>to be accounted for in competent testing.> The fact is you have several that take multiple lines, ...
All of your comments are off topic and irrelevant. They are not
even a usabilty issue in my layout and I do not get it why
you are this much pushing this far.
I believe all of your comments are self promotional, even though
you might refer to some good points like the gap at the resolution of
1280, which is not related to usability either in my layout.
All of your comments are off topic and don't have anything
to do with the List. 
I really do not want to bother those who are not interested in 
following, this thread. So I would like you to reply directly to 
me please instead of replying to the list.
Well, I believe I have answered to all the above in my previous
post and I do not want to repeat myself. 
However I encourage you to rethink on the issue of Screen resolutions.
Insisting on the fact that checking the manufacturers' web sites or 
some stores to get a fact about resolutions,can 
damage your reputation. 
There is no doubt that, it needs a solid global research. 
Your comment, is an awkward and unprofessional comment.
Did I say that I will use your definitions if you tell me? well I lied :) .
A 4th grade student will easily get the fact that if there is a 
browser bug it will be present at all RESOLUTIONS. So recoding your 
code to fix a problem with your design when you test your design at
only a specific resolution is not a bug fixing.
However, refinement or accessibility enhancement can be used for 
it but in the second degree. Because if there is a problem
in accessiblity etc only when browsing a layout at a specific resolution,
then it is the resolution which you need to do your for example 
accessibility enhancemnts for.
Let me give you an example. You code your layout and design it for
1024 * 768 and higher. You meet all the requirements for accessibility,
usability and so forth. There is nothing wrong with the accessibility, 
usability and readability of your layout unless somebody browses your 
web site at the resolution of lower than what you have tested for. 
Exactly same as layout stability (remember the real time example that 
i provided before too) issue.
So what you do here is that you go back and recode to enhance the 
accessibility, readability and usability of your layout for that RESOLUTION.
This is called designing for that resolution and a forth grade student
which has taken some english literature lessons, will recognize this. Maybe
we will need to take some courses together :) me for may grammar and 
you for your literature. 
By the way what was your mark for english literature at school? 
please disregard, that was just a joke. :) 
Declaring "Screen resolution is merely one of the variables that need 
to be accounted for in competent testing" by you is definitely another
awkward and unprofessional comment and can damage your reputation.
Screen resolution plays an important role on the readability, accessibility 
and usability of a website which is why you do your as you call "accessibility
enhancement" for. If you believe it is not,  why you are 
pushing the fact that there is a gap btween my picture and the 
content text at the resolution of 1280 and above? 
This is not even an usability issue (in my layout).
May be at some point I will design better than this to remove that gap
and the links with two lines but my layout has already lots of advantages
that most of the web sites on the internet has not. So I really do not have 
extra time to put on that. Actually if you let me I might!
But those are not causing any accessibility, usability, readability problems
with my layout.
> OK, you want revisit? Here it is:
> It has needed doing for some time, so I took quite 
>a bit of time to do it now...
>to show poorly-adaptive versus 
>web-friendly resolution-agnostic design.
Well, why do you need to even show it if there is any problem with my
layout and make a referrence for Future!!!! 
What are you trying to say up here? are you trying to say that
you are a better coder? and that my design is not stable? and that why
I invite coders to code for "layout stability"? Have you gotten problem
with my invitation? 
I repeat again, you have not even made any comments about 
accepting or rejecting the idea of coding for layout stability. You just 
go on and on repeating yourself without even thinking about 
my comments and only you are pushing to downsize my layout. 
Yes the fact is that if somebody is a professional designer and already
famous then does not need to keep disagreeing with little stuff to
bring himslef for everybody's attention and to promote himself
and make a refference for future to keep that going!!!
But you have got the wrong profession for your self my dear, there 
are better professions to get famous and get everybody's attention like
playing as an actor in movies!
The fact is that if you do not go off topic and you do not keep 
continuing disagreeing, then how you are going to promote yourself??
I did ask you to revisit my portfolio for the definition of "layout stability" and
I did ask for anything wrong with my layout in regards to "layout stability".
You stated that there are columns which are side by side in my
layout but at a certain resolution one of them jumping one step 
down. You mentioned the gap between my picture and the content at the
resolution of higher than 1280. 
However your captures DOES not provide any indication of that 
jump and DOES not provide a cross resolution/browser/platform
solution for that gap. AGAIN you failed to provide it.
As we have discussed before, the combination of % and em would work 
fine for most of the cases and you did not need to demonstrate that.
I do agree with that myself, AGAIN, which is why I have used the % for
body font and em for navigation elements. However I have experimented 
a layout mixed by % , em and px which is one of the best on the internet
in terms of "layout stability" cross browser/platform capabilities. 
And I have proved it. FOR THE FUTURE referrence! here it is the 
URL for this proof is as below:
At any time anyboy having problem browsing that url, is welcome 
to directly contact me. I will be more than happy to provide the
screen shots. 
I have all of them stored in a flash drive. Or maybe if I get time
i will create a gallery in my portfolio in addition to that URL. 
Please check back soon if you are having problem
with accessing that URL for screen captures of my layout.
For an updated URL please visit my portfolio at:
Now let me give this for the future refference too. I beleive you will find 
the url for that web site in your DEMONSTRATION!  as below: 
Type the following combination of keywords in google:
dancesrq homestead ballroom 
You will get to see it.  For a partialy screen capture of the layout
see here:
If http dancesrq homestead dot com  is the one that you have compared 
it with my portfolio in your demo for the future refference!, first of all 
how dare you can even put this web site side by side my portfolio?
Are you really a professional designer? I started to really doubt about it. 
Secondly, the layout is completely is different than what you have
in your DEMO. How you have gotten that layout? 
This web site is made by a site builder called "****" (don't want to 
advertise it, one can go through the code and just find that out)
and It does not even use a proper W3C doctype. It would render 
in quirks mode in IE and some Opera.
click on the link below for a portion of this web site's code:
and view it's source. I just didn't have time to really work on it 
and put the code in the body.sorry.
Is your demo at quirks mode? 
If the URL is different than what I mentioned, which i doubt it 
because the content look same, then please provide it's URL for 
I hope that the designer for that site is not you! because i will be so
sorry for myself for wasting my time to talking to you up here.
I refuse to make comment on the rest of your speech.
And as I mentioned before contact me directly please.
Are you ready for Windows Live Messenger Beta 8.5 ? Get the latest for free today!

More information about the thelist mailing list