<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Website layout dimensions today</title>
	<link>http://www.web-development-blog.com/archives/website-layout-dimensions-today/</link>
	<description>Web development tutorials, SEO articles and PHP script resources</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 12:44:01 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Michele</title>
		<link>http://www.web-development-blog.com/archives/website-layout-dimensions-today/#comment-87682</link>
		<dc:creator>Michele</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 15:14:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.web-development-blog.com/archives/website-layout-dimensions-today/#comment-87682</guid>
		<description>I had been limiting myself to no more than 800 pixels wide and at least attempting to maintain fluid designs. With someone in the house who keeps her text sized above normal, I am reminded daily how terrible a no-liquid design can look if the visitor simply needs larger text.

Part of me thinks that these handheld devices should be made to deal with the new site sizes that are becoming more common and the other part says that web programmers should always make their sites as accessible as possible. But, if we focus too much on accessibility we would all have 800 pixel wide sites with above average text sizes.

My approach, for the most part, will continue to be using fluid or at least semi-fluid designs that do not go totally out of shape if the text size is changed. If I see a number of visitors coming via these smaller hand-held devices then I might start using additional style sheets. Until then, they'll just have to use the scroll function.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I had been limiting myself to no more than 800 pixels wide and at least attempting to maintain fluid designs. With someone in the house who keeps her text sized above normal, I am reminded daily how terrible a no-liquid design can look if the visitor simply needs larger text.</p>
<p>Part of me thinks that these handheld devices should be made to deal with the new site sizes that are becoming more common and the other part says that web programmers should always make their sites as accessible as possible. But, if we focus too much on accessibility we would all have 800 pixel wide sites with above average text sizes.</p>
<p>My approach, for the most part, will continue to be using fluid or at least semi-fluid designs that do not go totally out of shape if the text size is changed. If I see a number of visitors coming via these smaller hand-held devices then I might start using additional style sheets. Until then, they&#8217;ll just have to use the scroll function.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baz L</title>
		<link>http://www.web-development-blog.com/archives/website-layout-dimensions-today/#comment-87482</link>
		<dc:creator>Baz L</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 03:11:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.web-development-blog.com/archives/website-layout-dimensions-today/#comment-87482</guid>
		<description>It's a simple numbers game actually. The stats on 800x600 sites come at about under 3%, the last time I checked.

But, this question has no right/wrong answer. It all depends on design time, target audience, design type, etc.

If you've got the time, then I guess you can try a fluid design. I don't like them, because they tend to stretch out too wide sometimes. Also, I'm just lazy that way.

For general business websites, I tend to go with a smaller width, since the audience is wider and may include lil' old grandmas with 5 year old computers. On blogs and graphical sites, I go a bit wider, sine the audience would be expected to have slightly newer PCs.

Type of design also plays a big role. More graphical sites tend to demand a larger display.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a simple numbers game actually. The stats on 800&#215;600 sites come at about under 3%, the last time I checked.</p>
<p>But, this question has no right/wrong answer. It all depends on design time, target audience, design type, etc.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;ve got the time, then I guess you can try a fluid design. I don&#8217;t like them, because they tend to stretch out too wide sometimes. Also, I&#8217;m just lazy that way.</p>
<p>For general business websites, I tend to go with a smaller width, since the audience is wider and may include lil&#8217; old grandmas with 5 year old computers. On blogs and graphical sites, I go a bit wider, sine the audience would be expected to have slightly newer PCs.</p>
<p>Type of design also plays a big role. More graphical sites tend to demand a larger display.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Olaf</title>
		<link>http://www.web-development-blog.com/archives/website-layout-dimensions-today/#comment-87421</link>
		<dc:creator>Olaf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:48:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.web-development-blog.com/archives/website-layout-dimensions-today/#comment-87421</guid>
		<description>Hi Chris,

I don't agree, sure most of your visits are by regular users using some "normal" computer, but these mobile computers area point at least for several types of websites...

Check how much of your people having a HD-TV, they are not a lot of them. So your website should be accessible with a lower resolution if you think that your site has to get visited from someones living room :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Chris,</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t agree, sure most of your visits are by regular users using some &#8220;normal&#8221; computer, but these mobile computers area point at least for several types of websites&#8230;</p>
<p>Check how much of your people having a HD-TV, they are not a lot of them. So your website should be accessible with a lower resolution if you think that your site has to get visited from someones living room <img src='http://www.web-development-blog.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://www.web-development-blog.com/archives/website-layout-dimensions-today/#comment-87399</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 14:54:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.web-development-blog.com/archives/website-layout-dimensions-today/#comment-87399</guid>
		<description>Yeah, I have been watching the viewer's resolution stats for years now and think that it is about that time to step up to the 1024x768 res for main websites. BUT, why not plan the design and use different style sheets for the various resolutions. Detect the viewers resolution and select the appropriate style sheet to use. If the client is willing to pay for the extra, it shouldn't be that difficult...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I have been watching the viewer&#8217;s resolution stats for years now and think that it is about that time to step up to the 1024&#215;768 res for main websites. BUT, why not plan the design and use different style sheets for the various resolutions. Detect the viewers resolution and select the appropriate style sheet to use. If the client is willing to pay for the extra, it shouldn&#8217;t be that difficult&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
