On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 7:00 AM, Tobias Kremer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting Aristotle Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> * Tobias Kremer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-06-17 11:40]: >> > I've started to code the site and the ongoing process is >> > available at http://www.funkreich.de/catalyst >> Hmm, that *requires* a maximised browser window on a 1024×768 >> screen. I don't know if it really should… how about a jello >> layout? > > A width of 960 pixels is the current standard for new sites without > skyscraper/wallpaper ads which must be visible on a 1024x768 15" CRT because > ad > clients and agencies still dictate that as the norm :) > > Compare my version with the already mentioned movabletype.org for instance. > > I hadn't heard of jello layouts before - it seems they're very rarely used ... > > --Tobias >
I think this design is by far the best, and would love to see it be "out there". >From the marketing side of things, I think that your 960px layout is nicely formatted. I think it would be more important to make sure it renders properly in lynx and text browsers than to worry about rendering properly for everybody regardless of browser width. Of course, this is something to be decided by the people implementing and isn't a nit on the actual layout. I would prioritize accessibility. There are a few reasons why I like this layout. The first, is that I think this layout will accommodate subordinate pages and layouts better than the rest. The text in the bar above can change based on context, but the header can remain fixed (a la rubyonrails.org) -- this would promote cohesiveness through the site. The header is short enough it doesn't take up an inordinate amount of space. Secondly, it will easily follow various grid based layouts without requiring any other tweaks. Looking at the header and the grid of the site, we can change from 3 column to 2 column (wide, thin; thin, wide; 50/50) for subordinate pages without a feeling of being out of center. Finally, it's what I find the most attractive in a usability sense. It may look somewhat "stock" but I don't find that to be a bad thing at all. People don't want to admire the layout and graphic design work of a framework. They want to have easily presented information in an aesthetically pleasing manner. This is, in my opinion, why standard layouts and design patterns exist. They cater towards getting the user the information without insulting their eyes with bad color combinations, etc. I could see this design being called bland, but I think it's a fantastic match for a web development framework. I'd rather go bland than "over the top" and either miss the design cues (http://grails.org/ - how many abused design patterns can you find?), or have clutter (http://www.djangoproject.com/ - I never use the django site, I just google and it finds it... too cluttered!) So, in a nutshell, good work Tobias. -J _______________________________________________ List: [email protected] Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
