Maximum safe width for web pages?

[Whitecrest]

bullshit and you know it SHITEcrest.

Oh good comeback.... ( * )

 

[Whitecrest]

our arguing troll Whitecrest has this little illusion about everything
being/must be commercial and sell That's why he wants everything have
pretty and flashy graphics...

Sorry you have a hard time dealing with someone that believes something
different than you do.

 

[Whitecrest]

That has nothing to do with this, it would be very easy make
http://www.premierphotographer.com so that it wouldn't require fixed
width. It's true that it looks better, but that is irrelevant, as you we
weren't talking about how things are laid out, not what they should look.

I was talking about the over all package, and layout is part of it.

 

[Whitecrest]

Whitecrest:
If you know that the floating thumbs have nothing to do with how crappy
you think the page looks, then how is your first statement relevant at all?
Do you just like to rip on other people?

Na I just like to say what I think. Some people have a problem with
that, some don't.

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Quoth the raven named Whitecrest:

Look at the other example, look at other successful photographic
sites. Do a little research into the product and the customer.
Hire a graphics team. Thats a start.

First, my site is not a photographic site, it's a club site. Second,
there is no product and no (paying) customer. I think I don't need a
graphics team. Thanks for your excellent advice.

 

[Leif K-Brooks]

The best width is 100% ... perhaps with max-width set to prevent pages from
growing so wide that they become hard to read on very wide browser windows.

I normally browse with a maximized window at 1280x1024 resolution, and I
like it. If I found text hard to read, I wouldn't do it. Please don't
make assumptions about how I like reading.

 

[Whitecrest]

First, my site is not a photographic site, it's a club site. Second,
there is no product and no (paying) customer. I think I don't need a
graphics team. Thanks for your excellent advice.

You asked me what it would take to make it better, I tell you, then you
say no. Which is your purgative. The famous "lead a horse to water"
syndrome....

 

[Lauri Raittila]

I was talking about the over all package, and layout is part of it.

Nobody else was. So your comment was irrelevant.

 

[Whitecrest]

Nobody else was. So your comment was irrelevant.

Yea we were, you just missed the evolution

 

[Toby A Inkster]

My code is made for a generic, "I don't know what I'm doing" kind of person
to drop their pic into a directory, some with thumbnails, some without, and
have it look good anyways.

I have written something much like that.

It is a web interface for a file server (it's password protected, so I
can't post a link I'm afraid) that allows you to go into a "thumbnail
mode" for any directories that contain images.

The thumbnail images are generated on the fly by ImageMagick (and then
cached!). All thumbnails have a width of 100px and a height that varies
depending on the original aspect ratio.

The markup is simply:

<ul class="thumbsls">
<li>
<a href="/script/viewimage.pl?file=/path/to/FILENAME"><img
src="/thumb-cache/path/to/FILENAME" alt="FILENAME" width="100"></a>
FILENAME
</li>
<!-- and more list items -->
</ul>

And the styling is:

ul.thumbls { margin: 0; padding: 0; clear: }
ul.thumbls li {
width: 150px;
float: left;
border: 1px solid #cc9;
padding: 0.5em;
margin: 0.5em;
font-size: 85%;
height: 250px;
text-align: center;
}

The effect created is pretty good, and it fits in as many images as
possible which is good for scanning through a directory containing
hundreds of images. (The "thumbnail mode" was created primarily for the
Marketing Dept's huge galleries of stock photos.)

 

[Jeff Thies]

I mean, if it were that important then you'd do up your websites in

Photoshop and use an image map for links.

I've actually seen that!

Talk about a site that must be hard to maintain!

Jeff

 

[Andy Dingley]

I guess in Bizzaro-world that statement would be true. Here in the real
world we like to make web sites dynamically.

There was a fad for this around 2000. Big server back-end tools like
Media360 for building dynamic Flash-based sites (and I mean _really_
dynamic).

 

[Whitecrest]

There was a fad for this around 2000. Big server back-end tools like
Media360 for building dynamic Flash-based sites (and I mean _really_
dynamic).

This brings up a good point. If something is not right (big dynamic
flash sites of 2000) the capitalistic nature of the Web will fix itself.
If it works, they use it, if it doesn't then loose it. The same is true
of the web today.

 

[OJ]

Image maps are bad for sight-impaired people.

So is tv?

oj

 

[Lauri Raittila]

Percentage, as in per cent, as in out of 100 parts. Allowable values
between 0 and 100.

Where did you read that? If there is sausages with 140% of meet, there
surely can be font that is 941% of another.

 

[Foofy (formerly known as Spaghetti)]

Where did you read that? If there is sausages with 140% of meet, there
surely can be font that is 941% of another.

Well you can have a font that's 941% of another! It would be 9.41 times
the size of the other font. As for the sausage, who the hell knows how
that works. But what do you expect from a world that adds dye to meats so
they look fresher?

 

[Mark Parnell]

As for the sausage, who the hell knows how that works.

It could have 140% as much meat as another sausage.

 

[Toby A Inkster]

As for the sausage, who the hell knows how that works.

Take 140g pork, 5g spices and 15g of various other gubbins. Boil it, skin
it and you'll often end up with only 100g of sausage (and no left-over
meat mixture). So the sausage is 140% meat.

Of course, physics class taught us about the conservation of matter. Those
60g of sausage mixture went somewhere. Mainly as fat that ran off during
heating.

 

[Neal]

Percentage, as in per cent, as in out of 100 parts. Allowable values
between 0 and 100.

Bzzt. My current income is 150% what it was several years ago. Gas prices
are 200% what they were 15 years ago. And the national debt is many
hundreds percent higher than not so long ago here...