Darren West wrote:
An alternative could be to develop with relative sizes for all measurements, allowing the interface to be scaled to any screen resolution. Examples can be seen at http://www.linkedin.com and http://www.sky.com
Dysfunctional examples, but they clearly show what many mean by "relative sizes" - font-size dependent layouts, without looking into the potential problems created by such a "framed" approach. 1: wanting or having a need for larger text, doesn't mean one has or want a larger screen and/or browser-window. 2: having a larger screen and/or browser-window, doesn't mean one wants or need larger text. Thus, "relative sizes" means a/the layout only works well within a certain window-size on a certain screen-resolution with a certain font-size, and can not adapt well to the end-user's environment and needs if they deviate from the designer's "frame". Sounds designer-friendly enough since they get to keep the designed proportions, but is not what I would call user-friendly. Page zoom in Opera, Firefox 3 and Safari 3 allow layouts to adjust to the end-user's environment and needs - unless the designer has declared "relative sizes" and/or other width-barriers. Since this user-friendly zoom-feature seems to be on its way in - after having been found only in Opera for years, it would be better if designers tried to make sure it could actually work as intended instead of designing for certain "relative or absolute sized frames". Since all browsers can also resize fonts (one way or another) independent of page zoom, "relative sizes" risk creating even more problems when both font resizing and page zoom are used. The latest mobile browsers also incorporates page zoom and font resizing in various forms in order to enhance the experience, so the more freedom we give those browsers to perform their job the easier it'll be for the end-user. Optimizing our designs for an "average" window-size is an ok approach IMO, as long as we don't "lock them in" so they fail too badly outside that "average" window. Personally I optimize for a range of 600 - 1200 in width, and am now working on extending the "don't fail too badly" range to 200 - 2400 in width by giving the browsers more freedom to determine proportions. I also get to keep _my_ design-proportions, since I design for the way browsers treat my layouts and make as much out of the many variables introduced by browsers and their various options as I possibly can. I use 3800 wide screens/browser-windows and mobile browser emulators to test on, and although there may be quite a few problems getting older browsers "perfectly" in line, I see no real problems in getting the new ones to play ball. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************