WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: fixed width or resizable pages

for

From: Austin, Darrel
Date: Nov 9, 2004 12:03PM

> Not really -- if the viewport is wider, then you're about to waste
> valuable space you could and /should/ use to show what you've got.

Well, that's subjective opinion. Some folks consider 'white space' a good
thing. I think it just depends on the particulars of the site. I usually
just let the page go as wide as the viewport and let people make up their
own minds, but I can seem some validity in the arguments to control extreme
widths.

> This doesn't matter since CSS allows you to support different media
> and devices (and you ideally use CSS).

CSS allows it, but we need to wait for the browsers to support it. ;o)

> Of course, but it nonetheless /makes/ a difference. Using a fixed
> layout you see, say, ten words per line and then enlarge the font
> that there are only eight words per line -- doing this using a liquid
> layout where one line uses the entire monitor width you'll see 40
> words a line then decreasing the line length to 32 words (still too
> much).
>
> (Hope this example illustrates what I meant before ;)

Oh...I completely agree. I disagree with experts claiming that there's an
exact 'sweet spot' in terms of line length. It varies. Extremes on both ends
can be troublesome...but few people read novels online anyways. In the end,
though, I find that people can make their own decision as to how they want
to read the page.

In otherwords, I find the line-length argument one worthy of some
discussion, but not really a viable argument, on its own, for fixed width
layouts. IMHO, of course. ;o)

-Darrel