Posted by Bergamot on 04/06/07 03:37

dorayme wrote:
> In article <57l6loF2dha8nU1@mid.individual.net>,
> Bergamot <bergamot@visi.com> wrote:
>
>> >>http://www.brightfinance.co.uk/
>> The columns widths are set in % (of window) with a
>> total max-width in ems,
>
> If this is meant to imply that the cols grow at merely resizing
> the browser window,

Perhaps you (I mean that collectively, not you personally) don't get the
max-width concept. :-\ To me, it is a beautiful and elegant solution.

> Another more likely example of a fluid design in this non 'font
> variable' sense is a thumbnail gallery with a great many pictures
> that are floated.
>
> In your example, there is none of this "taking advantage" in this
> pure sense I am describing.

Um, the site I pointed to is primarily text, so it does exactly the
right thing by limiting width in ems. I don't understand the confusion
(apathy?) about this.

What do you suggest that site should do differently to fit into whatever
definition of "fluid" you think applies? I'd really like to know.

> you need to take a deeper look at the idea if it is to connect
> and mean things to the average punter.

Actually, the comments I've heard so far make me think other people have
a narrow view of what a fluid design should be. Although the problem may
really be they don't *know* what it should be, thus they don't recognize
it when they see it.

--
Berg

[Back to original message]