On the contrary! Tabular info would probably benefit most from an elastic layout.
Hm, I probably would want to keep the tabular info presented in tact - so perhaps a bit of both to prevent info becoming incomprehensible when the webbrowser size is reduced beyond a certain limit. I’d hate to hunt info spread over too many lines.
That’s exactly why it should be elastic (em-based). 
With a fixed-width layout the table will reflow if you change the text size.
With a liquid layout the table will reflow if you change the window size.
With an elastic layout the table will not reflow. Everything stays where it is. The downside is that you may get a horizontal scroll bar if you enlarge the text size too much.
Oww my bad. I still had fluid in my head >.<
My train of thought also has been a bit influenced by the book I recently completed: designing without tables (just learning to break that habit) using CSS. There’s a chapter where they explain the use of a fixed-width layout in combination with tabular info (like event schedules etc).
However, when I read into the css samples now, I notice that they too include em-based parts into the design. So hence my slight confusion (and I should read better too).
I had a feeling that we were talking about the same thing, only using different words. I didn’t want to make any assumptions, though.
yep…my stats show just a little under %7 still use 800x600…but prolly different with different targeted sites…
Very much stimulating and informatice Simon!!! Good job. Carry on!!!
Cheers!!!:eyebrow: :eyebrow:
Currently experiencing some screen size problems. This should definitely be of assistance. Good read. Nice job man.
Great thread Thanks
As a noob this is really helpful. It brings some sense to the madness i was doing before.
Great post! You have answered many many questions I have been wondering about. Genius!
Thanks for this great knowledge sharing with all of us.
I try to use liquid layouts as much as possible. the min-width feature in CSS is definitely worth learning and is a great tool in your armoury.
Nice one, thanx for shairing with us
What’s the general consensus now when more and more users are turning to 16:9 (so called wide) resolution?
General consensus about what?
It’s good to design withing the 800x600 box, and to put the less pertinent information outside of that box. Great post…
Very well written.
Here are some statistics from a few low-volume websites I manage. Out of 1801 samples (about November and December):
[LIST][]800 x 600 – 6%
[]1024 x 768 – 39%
[]1152 x 864 – 6%
[]1280 x 1024 – 36%
[]1600 x 1200 – 1%
[]other/unknown – 9%
[*]JS turned off – 3%[/LIST]
I’m using Statcounter and they seem to have only the bins shown. They don’t report any of the new widescreen monitor sizes, which means they don’t report any of the Macintosh screen sizes either. I think they’ve also stopped counting smaller sizes such as 640 x 480 (which explains why I’ve not seen that at all in the last couple of years).
Scotty
Are those browser window sizes or monitor sizes?