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]
*******************************************************************
