Fixed Site Size

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Yogi_Bear_79, Oct 11, 2006.

  1. Yogi_Bear_79

    Yogi_Bear_79 Guest

    I've played with "liquid design" and have decided for this site, the best
    solution would be to build on a 800x600 basis. Basically what I want is to
    have the page be full on a 800x600 screen, and have blank space on the right
    or left when at a higher resolution.

    My site is built using <DIV> tags getting their information from the CSS
    file. Originally I made blank left and right columns, but they obviously
    resize with the screen resolution.

    How do I get the site to only utilize the section of the screen I indicated
    in the first paragraph?
     
    Yogi_Bear_79, Oct 11, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Yogi_Bear_79

    Ed Jay Guest

    Yogi_Bear_79 scribed:

    >I've played with "liquid design" and have decided for this site, the best
    >solution would be to build on a 800x600 basis. Basically what I want is to
    >have the page be full on a 800x600 screen, and have blank space on the right
    >or left when at a higher resolution.
    >
    >My site is built using <DIV> tags getting their information from the CSS
    >file. Originally I made blank left and right columns, but they obviously
    >resize with the screen resolution.
    >
    >How do I get the site to only utilize the section of the screen I indicated
    >in the first paragraph?
    >

    Begin with a div that's 800px wide less the width of scroll bars if you need
    to.
    --
    Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)
     
    Ed Jay, Oct 11, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Yogi_Bear_79

    Nico Schuyt Guest

    Yogi_Bear_79 wrote:
    > I've played with "liquid design" and have decided for this site, the
    > best solution would be to build on a 800x600 basis.


    That's a contradictio in terminis :) Liquid design fits in (almost) any
    window size.

    > Basically what I
    > want is to have the page be full on a 800x600 screen, and have blank
    > space on the right or left when at a higher resolution.
    > My site is built using <DIV> tags getting their information from the
    > CSS file. Originally I made blank left and right columns, but they
    > obviously resize with the screen resolution.
    > How do I get the site to only utilize the section of the screen I
    > indicated in the first paragraph?


    No fixed size but something like http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/test/div_small.htm


    --
    Nico Schuyt
    http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/
     
    Nico Schuyt, Oct 11, 2006
    #3
  4. Yogi_Bear_79

    dorayme Guest

    In article <452cad95$0$18371$>,
    "Nico Schuyt" <> wrote:

    > Yogi_Bear_79 wrote:
    > > I've played with "liquid design" and have decided for this site, the
    > > best solution would be to build on a 800x600 basis.

    >
    > That's a contradictio in terminis :)


    I don't think there is a contradiction here. A contradiction is
    seriously bad beast.

    > Liquid design fits in (almost) any
    > window size.
    >
    >
    > No fixed size but something like http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/test/div_small.htm


    "Liquid design fits in (almost) any window size"

    Fits is not in doubt. But fits and is nice or useful, this is
    another story. Very fine in abstract. And I am speaking as
    someone who almost never uses fixed. But it is quite a decision
    in practice. Take your url example. I personally would not want
    to see a lot of text that wide on my 20" screen. I can really
    very easily understand how tempting it is to bypass all the
    design thinking by making the whole damn show for some sites
    800px wide and be done! Will look fine on all screens 800 or
    more. Saves endless playing about, endless worry, endless
    max-widthing and then worrying about IE, eming, floating or
    positioning divs to take up useful space for other things and so
    on...

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Oct 12, 2006
    #4
  5. Yogi_Bear_79

    Nico Schuyt Guest

    dorayme wrote:
    > "Nico Schuyt" <> wrote:
    >> Yogi_Bear_79 wrote:


    >>> I've played with "liquid design" and have decided for this site, the
    >>> best solution would be to build on a 800x600 basis.



    >> No fixed size but something like
    >> http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/test/div_small.htm
    >> "Liquid design fits in (almost) any window size"


    > Fits is not in doubt. But fits and is nice or useful, this is
    > another story. Very fine in abstract. And I am speaking as
    > someone who almost never uses fixed. But it is quite a decision
    > in practice. Take your url example. I personally would not want
    > to see a lot of text that wide on my 20" screen.


    But text will almost always be wide on large monitors/windows. Do you
    suggest to use a fixed width standard?

    --
    Nico Schuyt
    http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/
     
    Nico Schuyt, Oct 12, 2006
    #5
  6. Yogi_Bear_79

    dorayme Guest

    In article <452db56d$0$53786$>,
    "Nico Schuyt" <> wrote:

    > dorayme wrote:
    > > "Nico Schuyt" <> wrote:
    > >> Yogi_Bear_79 wrote:

    >
    > >>> I've played with "liquid design" and have decided for this site, the
    > >>> best solution would be to build on a 800x600 basis.

    >
    >
    > >> No fixed size but something like
    > >> http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/test/div_small.htm
    > >> "Liquid design fits in (almost) any window size"

    >
    > > Fits is not in doubt. But fits and is nice or useful, this is
    > > another story. Very fine in abstract. And I am speaking as
    > > someone who almost never uses fixed. But it is quite a decision
    > > in practice. Take your url example. I personally would not want
    > > to see a lot of text that wide on my 20" screen.

    >
    > But text will almost always be wide on large monitors/windows. Do you
    > suggest to use a fixed width standard?


    This is not so with good design, my point is that one needs to
    put on a thinking cap big time sometimes to solve the various
    design problems around this issue. It is not a simple one. I
    would hate to read a line of text 16 inches long...

    I think that what can happen with pushing the liquid layout
    message too strongly is that one then has to turn around to
    constrain things in other ways. These other ways may be worth it.
    But they are time consuming. And you achieve little benefit for
    things like essays that bang on for quite a while, no pics, no
    nothing else, just words.

    If you want to have a discussion about this, here is a concrete
    example, cf

    http://members.optushome.com.au/droovies/opinion/drugLaws.html


    http://members.optushome.com.au/droovies/opinion/drugLawsFixed.htm
    l


    Or substitute anything else. There are various irritations
    whatever one sets for the width of the main div, px, ems, max,
    just width... I fiddle faddle constantly with such things and am
    secretly jealous of someone who has no qualms of setting the
    width to 600px or 800px and leaving it at that.

    My point is where in all this is the liquidity that is so
    valuable? There are so many different liquidities... Frankly,
    9what i have only set for an example here, the 600px fixed, suits
    me and is likely easier cross browser. But I realise it is all
    debateable.

    [I am surer about the evils of prohibition than liquid design!
    :)]

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Oct 12, 2006
    #6
  7. On 2006-10-12, dorayme wrote:
    >
    > I think that what can happen with pushing the liquid layout
    > message too strongly is that one then has to turn around to
    > constrain things in other ways. These other ways may be worth it.
    > But they are time consuming. And you achieve little benefit for
    > things like essays that bang on for quite a while, no pics, no
    > nothing else, just words.
    >
    > If you want to have a discussion about this, here is a concrete
    > example, cf
    >
    > http://members.optushome.com.au/droovies/opinion/drugLaws.html
    >
    >
    > http://members.optushome.com.au/droovies/opinion/drugLawsFixed.html


    Both of those work well, because neither uses a fixed width.

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
     
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Oct 12, 2006
    #7
  8. Yogi_Bear_79

    Nico Schuyt Guest

    dorayme wrote:

    I fiddle faddle constantly with such things and am
    > secretly jealous of someone who has no qualms of setting the
    > width to 600px or 800px and leaving it at that.



    Take care, this is an open forum! Liquid Design is sacred. There's a serious
    risk of being excommunicated

    --
    Nico Schuyt
    http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/
     
    Nico Schuyt, Oct 12, 2006
    #8
  9. Yogi_Bear_79

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    "Chris F.A. Johnson" <> wrote:

    > On 2006-10-12, dorayme wrote:
    > >
    > > I think that what can happen with pushing the liquid layout
    > > message too strongly is that one then has to turn around to
    > > constrain things in other ways. These other ways may be worth it.
    > > But they are time consuming. And you achieve little benefit for
    > > things like essays that bang on for quite a while, no pics, no
    > > nothing else, just words.
    > >
    > > If you want to have a discussion about this, here is a concrete
    > > example, cf
    > >
    > > http://members.optushome.com.au/droovies/opinion/drugLaws.html
    > >
    > >
    > > http://members.optushome.com.au/droovies/opinion/drugLawsFixed.html

    >
    > Both of those work well, because neither uses a fixed width.


    Not "because neither uses a fixed width". Let me explain briefly:
    true, I was rushing to get out to the beach and have my afternoon
    swim [1] and forgot to knock off the "max-" bit off the div
    width. If you would kindly knock it off and see the result, it
    still works fine, in fact, pretty much the same in decent
    browsers, who is going to go lower than 600 wide, even Alan
    Flavell would cope on one of his machines.

    You can make the technical point that it is still "liquid" with
    the max-width in, I am making the point that in many cases it
    really is not a big deal which way you go for some things and
    further that in some cases it saves a headache going truly fixed.
    But I am still thinking about all this stuff (I rarely use fixed
    myself, I wonder why the hell not sometimes! So many lovely sites
    employ it)

    [By the way, eat your hearts out you miserable, wretched, cold
    northern hemisphere earthlings, later this avo, I will go for a
    swim at

    http://members.optusnet.com.au/mons1/page6.htm

    but realise this: nowadays the beach is in full colour and is too
    glorious to tease you with.]

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Oct 12, 2006
    #9
  10. Yogi_Bear_79

    Andy Dingley Guest

    dorayme wrote:

    > Not "because neither uses a fixed width". Let me explain briefly:
    > true, I was rushing to get out to the beach and have my afternoon
    > swim


    Yes, but on _our_ planet we still have surface water, not dry canals.
     
    Andy Dingley, Oct 13, 2006
    #10
  11. Yogi_Bear_79

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <>,
    "Andy Dingley" <> wrote:

    > dorayme wrote:
    >
    > > Not "because neither uses a fixed width". Let me explain briefly:
    > > true, I was rushing to get out to the beach and have my afternoon
    > > swim

    >
    > Yes, but on _our_ planet we still have surface water, not dry canals.


    The pic at the top of
    http://www.csiro.au/csiro/channel/ich3u,,.html sure reminds me of
    home...

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Oct 13, 2006
    #11
  12. Yogi_Bear_79

    Yogi_Bear_79 Guest

    "Ed Jay" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Yogi_Bear_79 scribed:
    >
    >>I've played with "liquid design" and have decided for this site, the best
    >>solution would be to build on a 800x600 basis. Basically what I want is to
    >>have the page be full on a 800x600 screen, and have blank space on the
    >>right
    >>or left when at a higher resolution.
    >>
    >>My site is built using <DIV> tags getting their information from the CSS
    >>file. Originally I made blank left and right columns, but they obviously
    >>resize with the screen resolution.
    >>
    >>How do I get the site to only utilize the section of the screen I
    >>indicated
    >>in the first paragraph?
    >>

    > Begin with a div that's 800px wide less the width of scroll bars if you
    > need
    > to.
    > --
    > Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)


    Not sure why I can't figure this one out. I entered the following in my CSS

    #MainBody{
    position:absolute;
    width:800px;
    height:600px;
    }

    Opened it in the HTML like so
    <body>
    <div id="MainBody" align="center">
    .....
    </div>
    </body>
     
    Yogi_Bear_79, Oct 17, 2006
    #12
  13. Yogi_Bear_79

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    "Yogi_Bear_79" <> wrote:

    > "Ed Jay" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Yogi_Bear_79 scribed:
    > >
    > >>I've played with "liquid design" and have decided for this site, the best
    > >>solution would be to build on a 800x600 basis. Basically what I want is to
    > >>have the page be full on a 800x600 screen, and have blank space on the
    > >>right
    > >>or left when at a higher resolution.
    > >>
    > >>My site is built using <DIV> tags getting their information from the CSS
    > >>file. Originally I made blank left and right columns, but they obviously
    > >>resize with the screen resolution.
    > >>
    > >>How do I get the site to only utilize the section of the screen I
    > >>indicated
    > >>in the first paragraph?
    > >>

    > > Begin with a div that's 800px wide less the width of scroll bars if you
    > > need
    > > to.
    > > --
    > > Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)

    >
    > Not sure why I can't figure this one out. I entered the following in my CSS
    >
    > #MainBody{
    > position:absolute;
    > width:800px;
    > height:600px;
    > }
    >
    > Opened it in the HTML like so
    > <body>
    > <div id="MainBody" align="center">
    > ....
    > </div>
    > </body>


    You don't need to use absolute positioning. Given your desires,
    just a div 800px wide, make it 750px and see if you like it
    etc... If you want to centre the div, do so, that is an
    independent variable.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Oct 17, 2006
    #13
  14. Yogi_Bear_79

    Yogi_Bear_79 Guest

    "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > "Yogi_Bear_79" <> wrote:
    >
    >> "Ed Jay" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > Yogi_Bear_79 scribed:
    >> >
    >> >>I've played with "liquid design" and have decided for this site, the
    >> >>best
    >> >>solution would be to build on a 800x600 basis. Basically what I want is
    >> >>to
    >> >>have the page be full on a 800x600 screen, and have blank space on the
    >> >>right
    >> >>or left when at a higher resolution.
    >> >>
    >> >>My site is built using <DIV> tags getting their information from the
    >> >>CSS
    >> >>file. Originally I made blank left and right columns, but they
    >> >>obviously
    >> >>resize with the screen resolution.
    >> >>
    >> >>How do I get the site to only utilize the section of the screen I
    >> >>indicated
    >> >>in the first paragraph?
    >> >>
    >> > Begin with a div that's 800px wide less the width of scroll bars if you
    >> > need
    >> > to.
    >> > --
    >> > Ed Jay (remove 'M' to respond by email)

    >>
    >> Not sure why I can't figure this one out. I entered the following in my
    >> CSS
    >>
    >> #MainBody{
    >> position:absolute;
    >> width:800px;
    >> height:600px;
    >> }
    >>
    >> Opened it in the HTML like so
    >> <body>
    >> <div id="MainBody" align="center">
    >> ....
    >> </div>
    >> </body>

    >
    > You don't need to use absolute positioning. Given your desires,
    > just a div 800px wide, make it 750px and see if you like it
    > etc... If you want to centre the div, do so, that is an
    > independent variable.
    >
    > --
    > dorayme


    Ok, I changed it to

    MainBody{
    align:center;
    width:800px;
    }

    Opened it in the HTML like so
    <body>
    <div id="MainBody">
    </div>
    </body>

    The only item that appears to be affected is the header DIV which moved over
    to the right , but isn't limited to 800px. I am calling multiple <DIV> tags
    within the <div id="MainBody">. They are all sized by percentage, they are
    also using absolute positioning, could one they be the problem?
     
    Yogi_Bear_79, Oct 17, 2006
    #14
  15. Yogi_Bear_79

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    "Yogi_Bear_79" <> wrote:

    > > You don't need to use absolute positioning. Given your desires,
    > > just a div 800px wide, make it 750px and see if you like it
    > > etc... If you want to centre the div, do so, that is an
    > > independent variable.
    > >
    > > --
    > > dorayme

    >
    > Ok, I changed it to
    >
    > MainBody{
    > align:center;
    > width:800px;
    > }
    >
    > Opened it in the HTML like so
    > <body>
    > <div id="MainBody">
    > </div>
    > </body>
    >
    > The only item that appears to be affected is the header DIV which moved over
    > to the right , but isn't limited to 800px. I am calling multiple <DIV> tags
    > within the <div id="MainBody">. They are all sized by percentage, they are
    > also using absolute positioning, could one they be the problem?



    No, don't centre things with align.

    With the div fixed at 800px, say:

    #MainBody {

    width:800px;
    margin-left:auto;
    margin-right:auto;
    }

    Have you got a url or maybe I missed it? Have no idea what you
    have with the other divs?

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Oct 17, 2006
    #15
  16. Yogi_Bear_79

    Yogi_Bear_79 Guest

    "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > "Yogi_Bear_79" <> wrote:
    >
    >> > You don't need to use absolute positioning. Given your desires,
    >> > just a div 800px wide, make it 750px and see if you like it
    >> > etc... If you want to centre the div, do so, that is an
    >> > independent variable.
    >> >
    >> > --
    >> > dorayme

    >>
    >> Ok, I changed it to
    >>
    >> MainBody{
    >> align:center;
    >> width:800px;
    >> }
    >>
    >> Opened it in the HTML like so
    >> <body>
    >> <div id="MainBody">
    >> </div>
    >> </body>
    >>
    >> The only item that appears to be affected is the header DIV which moved
    >> over
    >> to the right , but isn't limited to 800px. I am calling multiple <DIV>
    >> tags
    >> within the <div id="MainBody">. They are all sized by percentage, they
    >> are
    >> also using absolute positioning, could one they be the problem?

    >
    >
    > No, don't centre things with align.
    >
    > With the div fixed at 800px, say:
    >
    > #MainBody {
    >
    > width:800px;
    > margin-left:auto;
    > margin-right:auto;
    > }
    >
    > Have you got a url or maybe I missed it? Have no idea what you
    > have with the other divs?
    >
    > --
    > dorayme


    Tried that different results, but not right..here's the test URL
    http://314rcsspouses.homedns.org/hollywoodoil/index.shtml
     
    Yogi_Bear_79, Oct 17, 2006
    #16
  17. Yogi_Bear_79

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    "Yogi_Bear_79" <> wrote:

    > "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > In article <>,
    > > "Yogi_Bear_79" <> wrote:
    > >


    > >
    > > No, don't centre things with align.
    > >
    > > With the div fixed at 800px, say:
    > >
    > > #MainBody {
    > >
    > > width:800px;
    > > margin-left:auto;
    > > margin-right:auto;
    > > }
    > >
    > > Have you got a url or maybe I missed it? Have no idea what you
    > > have with the other divs?


    > Tried that different results, but not right..here's the test URL
    > http://314rcsspouses.homedns.org/hollywoodoil/index.shtml


    This has too many errors to deal with.

    <http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http://314rcssp
    ouses.homedns.org%2Fhollywoodoil%2Findex.shtml>

    You using Frontpage? I suggest you don't for now.

    I would start from scratch again.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Oct 17, 2006
    #17
  18. Yogi_Bear_79

    Yogi_Bear_79 Guest

    "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > "Yogi_Bear_79" <> wrote:
    >
    >> "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > In article <>,
    >> > "Yogi_Bear_79" <> wrote:
    >> >

    >
    >> >
    >> > No, don't centre things with align.
    >> >
    >> > With the div fixed at 800px, say:
    >> >
    >> > #MainBody {
    >> >
    >> > width:800px;
    >> > margin-left:auto;
    >> > margin-right:auto;
    >> > }
    >> >
    >> > Have you got a url or maybe I missed it? Have no idea what you
    >> > have with the other divs?

    >
    >> Tried that different results, but not right..here's the test URL
    >> http://314rcsspouses.homedns.org/hollywoodoil/index.shtml

    >
    > This has too many errors to deal with.
    >
    > <http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http://314rcssp
    > ouses.homedns.org%2Fhollywoodoil%2Findex.shtml>
    >
    > You using Frontpage? I suggest you don't for now.
    >
    > I would start from scratch again.
    >
    > --
    > dorayme


    I'm using DreamWeaver, and not the GUI, just the code side. I ran the
    validator as well, 90% of the items it is flagging appear to be correct when
    I manually look at the code. So you are saying the way I am creating the
    MainBody Div in the css file is correct, and the way and place I am calling
    it in the HTML are correct? If that is the case then it must be the sizing
    of the other <DIV> tags within the MainBody tag.....

    For Example: Error Line 46 column 66: end tag for element "B" which is not
    open.
    ....enu("aboutus2","<b>&nbsp;About&nbspUs&nbsp&nbsp;</b>")Is it saying the
    closing </b> tag is not there?
     
    Yogi_Bear_79, Oct 17, 2006
    #18
  19. Yogi_Bear_79 wrote:
    > "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> In article <>,
    >> "Yogi_Bear_79" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> In article <>,
    >>>> "Yogi_Bear_79" <> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> No, don't centre things with align.
    >>>>
    >>>> With the div fixed at 800px, say:
    >>>>
    >>>> #MainBody {
    >>>>
    >>>> width:800px;
    >>>> margin-left:auto;
    >>>> margin-right:auto;
    >>>> }
    >>>>
    >>>> Have you got a url or maybe I missed it? Have no idea what you
    >>>> have with the other divs?
    >>> Tried that different results, but not right..here's the test URL
    >>> http://314rcsspouses.homedns.org/hollywoodoil/index.shtml

    >> This has too many errors to deal with.
    >>
    >> <http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http://314rcssp
    >> ouses.homedns.org%2Fhollywoodoil%2Findex.shtml>
    >>
    >> You using Frontpage? I suggest you don't for now.
    >>
    >> I would start from scratch again.
    >>
    >> --
    >> dorayme

    >
    > I'm using DreamWeaver, and not the GUI, just the code side. I ran the
    > validator as well, 90% of the items it is flagging appear to be correct when
    > I manually look at the code. So you are saying the way I am creating the
    > MainBody Div in the css file is correct, and the way and place I am calling
    > it in the HTML are correct? If that is the case then it must be the sizing
    > of the other <DIV> tags within the MainBody tag.....
    >
    > For Example: Error Line 46 column 66: end tag for element "B" which is not
    > open.
    > ...enu("aboutus2","<b>&nbsp;About&nbspUs&nbsp&nbsp;</b>")Is it saying the
    > closing </b> tag is not there?


    I don't know about that line but a very quick examination of your source
    I saw several items like this:

    <p align="center"><img align="absmiddle" src="images/BeckettLogo.gif"</p>

    See the error??? Hint: look at the IMG tag...

    Plus you have lots of deprecated presentational markup that you should
    define in your stylesheet and not in your HTML

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Oct 17, 2006
    #19
  20. Yogi_Bear_79

    Andy Dingley Guest

    Yogi_Bear_79 wrote:

    > I'm using DreamWeaver, and not the GUI, just the code side. I ran the
    > validator as well, 90% of the items it is flagging appear to be correct when
    > I manually look at the code.


    Here's a clue. Either the validator is getting it grossly wrong, or
    you're getting it wrong somewhere and you just haven't seen it yet.
    Your call.... We get a _lot_ of W3C Validator bug reports in this ng,
    yet it seems to need awfully few fixes.

    And a hint - validators rarely report errors, they usually report the
    first point _afterwards_ when the document became provably invalid
    after an earlier error. So if you can't see what the error was, start
    looking where it was reported, then scan back upwards through it.
     
    Andy Dingley, Oct 17, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?QmlkYXJrb3Rh?=

    How to set the DataGrid Row Size to a fixed size.

    =?Utf-8?B?QmlkYXJrb3Rh?=, May 19, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    856
    =?Utf-8?B?QmlkYXJrb3Rh?=
    May 19, 2005
  2. Chris R.

    Fixed size JPanel subclass

    Chris R., Jul 10, 2004, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    10,175
    Roedy Green
    Jul 12, 2004
  3. johnp
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    3,718
    Toby Inkster
    May 23, 2005
  4. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    654
    Harlan Messinger
    Sep 19, 2006
  5. Jason Cavett

    Preferred Size, Minimum Size, Size

    Jason Cavett, May 23, 2008, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    12,733
    Michael Jung
    May 25, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page