Visual Site Designer refuses 1024x768...

User 187934 Photo


Senior Advisor
20,191 posts

I would think that would be better. None of us knew that it was automatically compensating for a browser.:)
I can't hear what I'm looking at.
It's easy to overlook something you're not looking for.

This is a site I built for my work.(RSD)
http://esmansgreenhouse.com
This is a site I built for use in my job.(HTML Editor)
https://pestlogbook.com
This is my personal site used for testing and as an easy way to share photos.(RLM imported to RSD)
https://ericrohloff.com
User 2242615 Photo


Guest
6 posts

G'day,

If the size discrepancy is caused by factoring in the browsers "chrome", wouldn't the height be more affected than the width (there's generally more "junk" at the top of a browser than at the sides)? Both the examples quoted below state a static height but a difference in the width.

Both examples (1152X864 -> 1080X864 (reduction of 72 pixels) and 1024X768 -> 960X768 (reduction of 64 pixels)) show a width reduction of 6.666% and a height reduction of 0%.

If this is caused by factoring in browser chrome, shouldn't the reduction in both examples be the same, in terms of pixels?

Cheers,
Ewen :-)
User 1948478 Photo


Senior Advisor
1,850 posts

Scrolling vertically is 'normal' and expected. It's the horizontal scrolling that you want to avoid...
User 629005 Photo


Ambassador
2,174 posts

panic wrote:
If this is caused by factoring in browser chrome, shouldn't the reduction in both examples be the same, in terms of pixels?


I don't believe so... While I've never measured the pixel count on various screens, I'd fully expect them to be more % based than pixel based.
Living the dream, stocking the cream :D
User 364143 Photo


Guest
5,410 posts

Per wrote:
Scrolling vertically is 'normal' and expected. It's the horizontal scrolling that you want to avoid...

Source?
CoffeeCup... Yeah, they are the best!
User 2242615 Photo


Guest
6 posts

Phil wrote:
panic wrote:
If this is caused by factoring in browser chrome, shouldn't the reduction in both examples be the same, in terms of pixels?


I don't believe so... While I've never measured the pixel count on various screens, I'd fully expect them to be more % based than pixel based.

The width in pixels of window elements is generally (unless specifically coded otherwise) fixed. The width of the scroll bar in a 1024X768 window is the same width (in pixels) on a 1280X1024 window.

This is why I thought the reduction should have been by the same amount, regardless of screen resolution or window size.

Ewen :-)
User 117361 Photo


Ambassador
6,076 posts

Some comments on horizontal screen scrolling...it dates back a couple of years, but could still be considered a standard by some.
http://www.howtonotmakemoneyonline.com/2009/01/why-horizontal-scrolling-is-bad.html

It is not clear to me who wrote the article and what kind of authority they had to write it, but I can definitely recall that when I did my web design courses, it was one of the things we were encouraged to avoid. Having said that, I see that some designers actually use the horizontal scrolling as a design "feature", often for "arty" sites where the scrolling covers several "page widths" and not just a few badly placed pixels.
User 2240786 Photo


Registered User
2 posts

Many thanks, group. Very enlightening discussion. By the way, the design contest I entered is one of many available at CrowdSpring.com, if any of of you are interested.
User 422767 Photo


Registered User
259 posts

Gail Marsella wrote:
Many thanks, group. Very enlightening discussion. By the way, the design contest I entered is one of many available at CrowdSpring.com, if any of of you are interested.


I see how to make a listing, but not how to enter any of the contests. :P

Janys Hyde wrote:
Some comments on horizontal screen scrolling...it dates back a couple of years, but could still be considered a standard by some.


I was always told to not let it happen on accident, but if I was doing it on purpose to make it very obvious and very user-friendly. :)
Aren't you a little short for a Storm Trooper?

Have something to add? We’d love to hear it!
You must have an account to participate. Please Sign In Here, then join the conversation.