|
|
Posted by Roy A. on 01/16/07 09:09
David Segall skrev:
> "aa" <a@aa.com> wrote:
>
> >what is the most common screen resolution these days?
> The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many to
> choose from
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vector_Video_Standards.png>. I
> would guess that XGA (1024x768) is currently the most common. I think
> that aspect ratio is as important as resolution and I don't think you
> should design for this 4:3 aspect ratio. The boom in "wide screen" LCD
> televisions has resulted in a price drop for the 16:9 and 16:10 aspect
> ratio LCDs which will be reflected in the coming sales of computer
> monitors.
> >For what resolution do you usualy design?
> I try, and fail, to make them acceptable from 800x600 to my own
> current 1680x1050 screen.
> >What is the technique to designe an HTMP page which would automatically fit
> >into the resolution set on a particalar Windows installation?
> Print media provides a reasonable guide and they vary the number of
> columns on a printed page to compensate for changes in the width of
> the page. I don't know of any way to do that in HTML.
If you consider both tables and floating divs as tools to lay out your
page, html with css2 offer you som help. At least in the
specifications. With floating divs, columns could be given a relative
width and jump up or down to compensate for changes in the width.
Unfortunately the properties for minimum and maximum widths are, as I
can recall, not supported. You could try with relative but fixed width,
but it could be hard to avoid white space where it shouldn't be.
The css2 specification is eight years old, so we can always hope.
Absolutely positioned divs could give you a mess that is hard to handle.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|