Thanks everyone for your quick response! I think I will be able to do it now.
Regards, Kaanya, Vitthal Kaanya! On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:46 PM, Skip <[email protected]> wrote: > This is my experience as well. One other thing though is bandwidth > constraints. Feeding marginally useful images to a bandwidth constrained > device makes the application less responsive. So, some javascript > "sniffing" is useful when this is the case and building the page with some > <#if> ftl is helpful in solving this problem. > > Skip > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jacques Le Roux [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 7:51 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Formal Discussion > > > I think Paul as a point here, but I was reading Paul's comment in this 6 > months old thread http://markmail.org/message/3a5cdvxucijkf4mw and > wondered > about it. > Because it sounded like opening a can of worms to me. So I asked advice to > someone who knows far better current UI tricks and trends than me. > > Here is what she said: > <<Javascript has its uses (e.g. exchanging images for high rez screens for > higher resolution images) but in most cases Responsive Solutions will be > CSS > based with maybe some javascript to do some stuff in smaller screens for > opening and closing things. > As for max-width: the trend with responsive design has been to make it look > good on all sizes of screens, meaning you either work from your smallest > version (mobile first) or the largest (desktop first) and then put > breakpoints as your design needs them. Not as devices change because device > pixel sizes change at a rate that is not sustainable to maintain. That is > also why user agent sniffing and device sniffing is not a good idea. > Samsung > alone has a range of a 100 or so smartphones. Chances that you are sniffing > all correctly is almost 0. Just for a short look at what a range of pixels > we are talking: http://screensiz.es/phone. And that is leaving "strange" > devices, like a car monitor, a PS Vita, a Nintendo wii, your refrigerator, > etc., out of the equation... > We are moving towards a world where you have to design apart devices, > purely > based on pixel widths and showing everything in a visually pleasing way. > That is why, imo, only a truly fluid layout can survive that will adapt to > any screen width>> > > I believe she is quite right, things are evolving far to fast (er, screen > resolutions ;o) to try to follow them... > > Jacques > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Piper" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 3:48 PM > Subject: Re: Formal Discussion > > > > Hi Ted, > > > > the difference between adaptive and responsive is as follows: > > > > Adaptive is modified with specific screens in mind - in the case of the > link > > shared 450px. Anything in between is not covered, as I pointed out in > > another thread a while ago. Hence it doesn't work for any device not > fitting > > the target spec - tablets, android phones, phones held sideways etc. > > > > Responsive on the other hand adapts itself to the different screen sizes, > > stretches and modifies the look and feel entirely for a broader range of > > devices. > > > > As a quick reference, have a look at: > > > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14831530/responsive-design-vs-adaptive-de > sign > > > > http://www.symphonyonline.co.uk/design/item/responsive-layout-vs-adaptive-la > yout-whats-the-difference > > > > You can achieve an optimal UX with both implementations, but they > certainly > > aren't the same. The former also requires alot of work and constant > > modification. > > > > As far as the bigfish promotion is concerned, I am fine with people > showing > > their products, but blatantly promoting it on every post is just not my > cup > > of tea. Nuff said... > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Formal-Discussion-tp4643139p4643149.html > > Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
