Hi All,
I concur with all the valid points raised below confirming my findings
over the years and through hands on experience. We can all read a book,
but there are many times a technique or method is not found in written
pages. This can be said for web development and authoring. As just one
example of this is back in 1998 when I could import a Bitmap file into
front page programme and convert the file into a gif, whilst at the same
time retaining the colour resolution. You cannot find that in books.
The points I have raised is to try and get everyone to start thinking
beyond the surface of the issues. My views are not to say we must
conform to this size or that. At the end of the day results can be
generated most accurately from experience. I would say that many with a
wide screen display monitor worth some 3 - 400 pounds would have their
monitor set to 1024 x 800. But the maths starts to come to the fore in
the equation of saying what is the percentage ratio across the whole of
the World Wide Web with some 6 billion users, how many actually have
wide screen 21" monitors. The percentage ratio's would be small.
So by pushing the bounds too fast, is to say regardless of audience and
user base. We are going to develop in this size because we can.
It's not the question of big brother either trying to dictate any rules,
it's a question of a reasonable compromise to try and meet the demands
of the masses but at the same time retaining some cohesive ground rules.
Regards
Alastair
Brian Butterworth wrote:
On 01/04/2008, *Andrew Bowden* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> I would suggest that with the recent appearance of cheap
> ultra mobile devices that 800x480 would be a more suitable
> minimum screen size.
I have found that people with poor eyesight often take their high
resolution monitors and adjust them to 640x480 or 800x600 so the
picture is big enough for them.
People oddly prefer this to the other option, for an LCD screen, to
move it closer.
That's when you need a nice fluid design!
Now if only most of the worlds web designers agreed with me :)
I suspect that it is just a simple fact that because HTML does not
exactly specify how the text and graphics SHOULD be rendered, you are
never going to be able to have a design where the content can flow to
the device.
People with wide screen monitors ask why the content is not wider ...
then people with wheel mice want the content taller!
You can't tell the width of the page when you are generating a page,
and you can't depend on Javascript to be enabled or even there on the
target device.
Then there is the damn fonts. Only Internet Explorer supports .EOT
fonts, so you have to render them for Netscape and Opera and Macs.
Finally, if you mix text and graphics you don't know which devices are
bitmap text, which anti-aliased and if so how so. Windows XP has
ClearType but the Vista on is better.
And the solution is ...
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk <http://backstage.bbc.co.uk>
discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial
list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
--
Please email me back if you need any more help.
Brian Butterworth
http://www.ukfree.tv
begin:vcard
fn:Alastair Agutter
n:Agutter;Alastair
org:RNCSA;Information Technology Marketing and Communications
adr:Flat 4, 82 - 84 Walpole Road ;;FAO Alastair Agutter;Great Yarmouth;Norfolk;NR30 4NG;United Kingdom
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Senior WWW Developer and Founder
tel;home:01493 300856
tel;cell:0796 820 9007
note;quoted-printable:-=0D=0A=
=0D=0A=
IBM Development Team=0D=0A=
Mozilla Development Foundation Project Owner=0D=0A=
BBC Back Stage Site Owner Member and Developer=0D=0A=
Microsoft Software Development Network=0D=0A=
Microsoft Programme Development Partner=0D=0A=
Sun Microsystems Parter=0D=0A=
Real Media Producer Programme Partner=0D=0A=
Institute of Legal Executives=0D=0A=
Netscape Dev Edge Team=0D=0A=
AOL Instant Messenger Development Partner
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:www.pineappleblue.net
version:2.1
end:vcard
