Pros and cons?
alot of the biggish sites (ibm, hp, ecommerce sites) use a fixed layout generally 3 column which seems to be based on 800x600, However what are the advantages to this over flexible? why not make a flexible layout which can fit in 800x600? but will still look good make use of screen resources when viewed at higher resolutions..
12-03-2002, 11:15 AM
I'm a big fan of flexible layouts! It's often a challenge to get one working correctly, but as you stated such a site makes optimal use of the available window width.
My standpoint therefore is: always aim for a flexible (or fluid) layout!
12-03-2002, 11:18 AM
I prefer layouts that are flexible, so that if I have a high res, I dont have a little column like website, which looks horrible. But then again, there are lots of sites that look good no matter what the resolution is, despite being fixed, like www.shadowness.com.
Btw, VB is flexible, so what does that have to say?
o.k what about navigation. this is the thing, the page may stretch but if the nav is fixed to the right then well.. > :( <
what i mean is
just as an example the top frame containing navigaiton stretches.
now in most cases this is fine. I have been wondering though if it's a good idea to do this for the simple fact that people with big screens (inc me :) ) end up with the nav way over in the right corner.
12-04-2002, 08:08 AM
It doesnt really matter if the page stretches out, as long as the navigation stays where it meant to be, which is the left for your site.
It is fine, and if it stretches it is a lot better, seeing as then you wouldnt have the menu in the middle of the page.
You would also have to make your other content flexible too, using % instead of pixels.
12-04-2002, 10:45 AM
the example you gave uses a frameset to keep the header in place; that's another solution. If you don't care for a right-aligned nav bar, align it center, or left, whatever.
12-04-2002, 02:49 PM
If you use frames you will have to use them properly, because not many people are fond of frames....