What resolution to use nowadays for a site? I did mine a few years ago and it's changed a lot since then.
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp
Thanks, what about pictures and graphics? I know html 5 has gradients and things like that to spice up logo text but I imagine they can't compare to a properly decorated jpeg text logo.
So what does one do? I know you can use % as width, with minimum width etc. Is that the way to go?
Great links by the way; many thanks .
img { max-width:100%}
What resolution to use nowadays for a site? I did mine a few years ago and it's changed a lot since then.
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp
960 is still very dominant. While technology focused individuals make you believe responsive design is the way to go, there is much more needed effort required from a graphic design principle. This is a typical tech/business discussion and often the additional cost doesn't warrant it. Sometimes, because it can be done doesn't mean it is better. If you use the body width of 960px, you are optimized for the vast majority of users. Most people really don't upgrade monitors as fast as some think.
There are some good 960 Grid CSS frameworks available. Look at 960.gs, Yahoo UI grid css, and Blueprintcss.org
If you make headers expandable to full width and then keep the 960 body centered, you will have a great result.
Of course, mobile design requires a separate approach. But the trick is to find the most common denominator in height and width.
Thanks, what about pictures and graphics? I know html 5 has gradients and things like that to spice up logo text but I imagine they can't compare to a properly decorated jpeg text logo.
So what does one do? I know you can use % as width, with minimum width etc. Is that the way to go?
Great links by the way; many thanks .
Not quite sure what you mean by "technology focused individuals" but I'd say that you have to be damned sure your current visitor stats are bucking the current trend and your mobile users aren't increasing.
For photos I tend to use an .htaccess file that calls on a cookie with the users screen width, no one gets served an image wider than their screen. I layer a fallback with very basic browser detection to detect older phones / users without JavaScript.
For graphic elements I add them into a webfont. They are then vectors so resize without difficulty. It also cuts down on hits to the server as all graphics / icons are contained within one file.
Responsive is the biggest trend these days... although I have yet to adopt it. I"m a bit stubborn
I just don't like that fact that I would have to compromise my already existing layouts to incorporate responsiveness. I would basically have to recreate all of my websites.
Agree completely; why bother changing your code when it's working fine, only for the code to change in another year .
Responsive is the biggest trend these days... although I have yet to adopt it. I"m a bit stubborn
I just don't like that fact that I would have to compromise my already existing layouts to incorporate responsiveness. I would basically have to recreate all of my websites.
Responsive is the biggest trend these days... although I have yet to adopt it. I"m a bit stubborn
I just don't like that fact that I would have to compromise my already existing layouts to incorporate responsiveness. I would basically have to recreate all of my websites.
You don't understand responsive web design.960 is still very dominant. While technology focused individuals make you believe responsive design is the way to go, there is much more needed effort required from a graphic design principle. This is a typical tech/business discussion and often the additional cost doesn't warrant it. Sometimes, because it can be done doesn't mean it is better. If you use the body width of 960px, you are optimized for the vast majority of users. Most people really don't upgrade monitors as fast as some think.
There are some good 960 Grid CSS frameworks available. Look at 960.gs, Yahoo UI grid css, and Blueprintcss.org
If you make headers expandable to full width and then keep the 960 body centered, you will have a great result.
Of course, mobile design requires a separate approach. But the trick is to find the most common denominator in height and width.
You don't understand responsive web design.
RWD isn't just about page width. An iPhone display is vastly different than a desktop browser. The point of responsive design is to provide the appropriate experience.
Tonight I am going to take a look at Adobe's Edge Reflow package. This is the first thing they have done in recent years that has gotten me excited. If it does what they say it might be a really useful tool. If not then I'll be hand coding my latest project.
I thought Adobe Edge Reflow was more of a responsive design application, not something that produces production level code.
I dunno what it really does and how well it does it. That is why I'm going to take a look at it. And yes, it is a responsive design tool.
It if produces horrible code like most WYSIWYG editors then I'll just hand code. I'm not looking at a very complex design. I just wanted to see what Reflow can do.
Well I'm planning on using it for my next project during the design stage. I just assumed it would output dodgy, unoptimised code.