all i’m really doing (i think) is adding a branding section, adding a sticky footer, removing an alternating image & making a few cosmetic changes. the trouble is - & this is probably cos of the way i’ve done it, when i check out the new version at different screen sizes things don’t look too good
the original coder (a doctor) just set a fixed width of 1150px for the main content div. i’m wondering whether i should just stick with this, or try & build a bit of ‘responsiveness’ in
i was thinking perhaps a bit of fluid design within reason. maybe the loginbox on the right moving between some values, the intro & tabs blocks resizing within some limits (not sure about sizing & positioning wrt ems/pixels etc), & whether to use just one big image for the branding section (instead of 2 that mess up a bit when the screen size changes)
i know its a bit vague what i’m asking, so no worries if you can’t really help. but i wanna try for something like the new design if possible (cos that’s what the client wants) but if push comes to shove i’ll take something a bit simpler & easier to implement (thus appreciate any “i’d do that” type stuff)
Min/max/em sites are talked about in the end of this (rather heated) thread but I think you will find the information interesting.
It’s harder to turn a fixed site into a fluid one than it is to build it from scratch because you can prepare images and make design changes at the start to suit the content you want to display. You can still change the page using suitable min and max widths (see the thread I mentioned above for some suggested widths) but then you also need to cater for elements so that they can wrap in the space available.
Your login for example could still remain a fixed width but just wrap under the logo in one block at smaller screen sizes. The text on the left could be a fluid width container with min-max constraints.
Some elements can be in percentages and scale within reason but some that hold fixed width images will need to have a min-width set to cater for the largest item.
It gets harder when you want multiple background images to line up exactly in a fluid layout and then you should think about changing the design to something more suitable to a fluid design and avoid those issues.
A problem here that is faced by a lot of sites is that there is an idea of a pretty design and then content is squeezed into that design. Things like the read more button controlled by JS is an example (to me at least) of the desire for something cool overriding the real needs of those visiting the site–whether they be on a desktop or tiny mobile device. Not many people want to hear this yet, but I’d suggest you first focus solely on the needs of the content–that is, making is easy to follow and find what you need. Then, only if strictly necessary, add in some decoration … but try not to let it interfere with the accessibility of the site. One easy way to make a site more responsive is to ditch your CSS file. Yep, HTML on its own is perfectly responsive. It’s things like CSS and JS that mess it up–such as a wide, fixed width layout, making it a misery to view on a small device, for example.
Of course, the client won’t want to know about this, but it’s a shame to be ruled by them. Just like it’s a shame if patients dictate to the doctor what the diagnosis should be.
& ralph, i put the case to the clients for a complete site redesign in the first meeting. its a higgledy-piggledy site built by an amateur; ok as long as he’s the only one working on it but a nightmare for anyone else, especially a themer (inline styles everywhere, style rules coming from all sorts of places, etc, etc)
but they were determined to do it their way, so i said i’d see what i could do
[ i’m starting to think that wasn’t such a great idea ]
Yeah, I’ve recently decided that it’s “my way or the highway” for clients, as I’m sick of being told to do things that are impractical. I’d rather not do this work at all than do things I know aren’t right.
you’re right. being told to do impractical things by people who don’t understand is a mugs game
trouble is, my diet isn’t generally too great, so if i feel like saying no to a client i get this feeling that its just because i’m lazy, inflexible & whatever. so i say yes & then regret it when it turns out just like i expected it to. plus i’m doing the work as a favour for a family friend, so i don’t wanna rock the boat if there’s a non-rocking option
[ should probably eat fruit & vegetable juices for 2 months like an aussie guy i saw in a documentary last night. it made him think much clearer. maybe it’ll work for me ]