Lock the window size

[Guest]

Hi again

I have a new question - this time regarding the window size.
If I'm optimising the site for 800x600 pxl, is it possible to lock the
window size in the browser so it cannot be changed?

Or is it possible to make the site so it dynamically follows the window when
resizing? This would be better

 

[MD Websunlimited]

No but you can define a single cell table with a fixed size of 760 X 560 and design within that.

 

[Murray]

Seems rude. What about those who have smaller screens?

 

[MD Websunlimited]

Hi Bubbles,

Yes, you can use the window resize event to reset the size back.

The latter is the best and can be accomplished by using tables with % widths instead of fixed sizes. You may also use DIVs (layers)
to accomplish.

 

[MD Websunlimited]

Was the entire post read? If not, read Bubbles last statement.

 

[Murray]

Yeah - and I agree with your recommendation, although I don't understand
your comment about using divs to accomplish....

 

[MD Websunlimited]

There are two methods to web layout, tables and layers. The latter is, IMHO, the best method given today's browsers. But it also my
be the most difficult to master as it requires that you understand not only HTML but CSS.

 

[Jon Spivey]

Mike,
I'd say there's 3 - tables, layers and floated divs. Using "layers" ie
positioned divs was popular a while ago but seems to have fallen out of
favour now (for good reason - to my mind laying out a page with layers is
like trying to eat a pizza with chopsticks.) The CSS "gurus" seem to have
settled on floated divs - I've found a simple 2/3 column layout table
coupled with CSS is normally the most efficient. The one advantage to
floated divs is one can get the main content of a page first in the HTML,
this can be a nice advantage from a search engine ranking standpoint.

 

[Murray]

The latter is, IMHO, the best method given today's browsers.

I certainly agree that using "LAYERS" as a layout method is not the best
choice, but I definitely would not agree that using CSS-P is not the best
method. There is a huge difference between those two.

Using LAYERS as an exclusive layout methodology can lead to a page that is a
horrible mess if the browser's text size is changed and those layers begin
to overlap as the text pushes against the envelope of the layer's
boundaries.

Using positioned divs can work very nicely, even in today's browser
environment.

And I personally think that if you want to build more than hobby sites, you
must understand both HTML and CSS.

Now - having said that, building a flexible site with "layers" is not easy,
as you probably know.

 

[Murray]

When was the last time you actually ATE a pizza with chopsticks? 8)

If the chopsticks are broad enough, it's not so hard! 8)

 

[MD Websunlimited]

Even "floated" divs are still of form of using divs (layers) for layout. The float is an attribute of the div.

IMHO,

 

[MD Websunlimited]

I concur for the most part. Where we disagree is the statement "... if the browser's text size is changed ..." there are techniques
for handling that.

Some major site that use table-less Div layout:
http://www.espn.com
http://www.sitepoint.com
http://devedge.netscape.com
http://ww.alistapart.com

All the above are money making sites -- they are not toys developed by web developers for web developers.

 

[Murray]

Here is my site -

http://www.great-web-sights.com

No tables there. I don't consider that a toy, either.

 

[Jon Spivey]

True - but in FP "layer" means an absolutely positioned div (ie Insert -
Layer left: 10px top:10px etc) As far as FP is concerned a "layer" doesn't
have a float attribute. I could make a business case for using tables for
layout and in some situations make a case for floated divs but I couldn't
make a case for layers/positioned divs in any situation. IMHO

 

[Murray]

First - we need to agree that the word "Layer" has no real meaning in HTML.
It's not defined by the W3, and has only been adopted as a name of
convenience by several HTML authoring manufacturers. In fact there is only
a vague definition of "layer". But here's what I think is an accurate
description.

A Layer is really ONLY an absolutely positioned <div>

A non-positioned <div> is NOT a layer.

A floated div is usually NOT a layer.

A relatively positioned div is NOT a layer.

I can use positioning (and floating, for that matter) on any page element -
<img>, <table>, whatever.

 

[Jon Spivey]

When was the last time you actually ATE a pizza with chopsticks? 8)About the same time I drank beer through a straw - a lot of messing about
and wasn't very satisfying

 

[Murray]

I see what you're getting at.... 8)

--
Murray

About the same time I drank beer through a straw - a lot of messing about
and wasn't very satisfying