On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 01:15:52PM +0200, Christian Grobmeier wrote: > Anyway I made you a quick'n'dirty look for fluid: > http://code.grobmeier.de/incubator-draft-v2/index-fluid.html Well, the previous iteration (<http://code.grobmeier.de/incubator-draft-v2>) was also "fluid", in the same way that just about every other modern major site is fluid: there are graphical elements, either visible (the top bars on <http://cnn.com>, <http://news.yahoo.com>) or invisible (the container divs on <http://nytimes.com>, <http://yahoo.com>) which grow and shrink so that the page always looks appropriate no matter the browser window width.
It's just that the boxes which hold *text* did not change width in your previous variant. > Do you like that more? > Other thoughts? I really like the way the previous iteration was going, and I strongly prefer it over the fluid-text-box variation. Aesthetically, super long line lengths make it difficult for the eye to re-anchor itself on the next line when jumping left -- they are taxing for the same reason that ragged-left justification is harder on the eye than ragged-right. Practically, fluid text boxes are more demanding to design around in terms of CSS wizardry, spacial visualization skills and web design experience. The centered-rigid layout will be easier for others to maintain and to keep things looking right in all browsers and at all window widths. Cheers, Marvin Humphrey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
