|
|
Posted by Ed Seedhouse on 12/06/06 15:15
On 6 Dec 2006 02:28:46 -0800, "Travis Newbury"
<TravisNewbury@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Ed Seedhouse wrote:
>> On 4 Dec 2006 09:26:12 -0800, "Travis Newbury"
>> <TravisNewbury@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >Ed Seedhouse wrote:
>> >> People still do fixed width sites?
>> >I prefer fixed width sites
>> Hardly the point. What do people who have to use your sites prerfer?
>Ahh, your opinion is obviously more what people need.
My opinion is based on some facts. Fixed width sites are generally
brittle and harder to use. Are you writing a web site just for
yourself, or for the folks with web browsers that you want to visit it?
Of course content is vastly more important than mere layout. I go back
to sites that truly suck design-wise because they have content I really
want. But given that you have content that people want to use why would
you go out of your way to design your site in a way that makes it harder
to use than it needs to be? Fixed width designs do just that. There
are even worse offences out there, but fixed width is one of them.
What about people who don't see so well and have to enlarge your fonts?
What happens to your fixed width sites on a few size increases?
>> >> Do they design cars that still require a hand crank to start as well?
>> >Ahhh, you are implying that it is obsolete.
>> Yes indeed.
>The key word is "you"
If you look around a bit on the web you will find that it is hardly just
"me". Take a look at http://pages.prodigy.net/chris_beall/TC/ for
instance.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|