From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 3 06:53:01 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5969616A4CE for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2005 06:53:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpq3.home.nl (smtpq3.home.nl [213.51.128.198]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC8D543D54 for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2005 06:53:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dodell@offmyserver.com) Received: from [213.51.128.136] (port=34715 helo=smtp5.home.nl) by smtpq3.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1D6kCf-0002Lo-Cp; Thu, 03 Mar 2005 07:52:57 +0100 Received: from cc740438-a.deven1.ov.home.nl ([82.72.18.239]:33166 helo=192.168.1.104) by smtp5.home.nl with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1D6kCc-0001f4-2K; Thu, 03 Mar 2005 07:52:54 +0100 From: "Devon H. O'Dell" To: "Matthew D. Fuller" In-Reply-To: <20050303033920.GB1280@over-yonder.net> References: <9C4E897FB284BF4DBC9C0DC42FB34617641B5B@mvaexch01.acuson.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050302124137.0f2ad860@209.152.117.178> <20050303033920.GB1280@over-yonder.net> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Offmyserver, Inc. Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 07:52:52 +0100 Message-Id: <1109832772.3932.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 (2.0.2-3) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AtHome-MailScanner-Information: Please contact support@home.nl for more information X-AtHome-MailScanner: Found to be clean cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Logo idea and FreeBSD.com concept X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 06:53:01 -0000 On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 21:39 -0600, Matthew D. Fuller wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 03:02:04PM -0500 I heard the voice of > Warren Myers, and lo! it spake thus: > > > > The width is directly tied to readability. If someone needs to > > resize the window down just to read what you have to say, they will > > most likely move on. > > If someone needs to resize the window down, that's a sign that their > window is too wide in the first place. > > *I* will tell my web browser what size I want it to be, thanks. YOU > just give me the content that goes into it. This topic has certainly sparked conversation between the designers among us. I'd like to point out that I wasn't talking about the content of the entire page; so perhaps IBM was a bad example since their page content _never_ scales. On that note, one person pointed out to me privately that Sun's webpage does scale. I'm aware of this: it's simply the front page that is statically sized. The front page should have a static size, in my opinion, for a variety of reasons. For such a site, your front page is more a portal to the rest of your pages. You want to give a clear, understandable and easily navigable layout. A static layout allows you to position the elements of the page in a large, quickly identifiable format and to give ``front- page style'' to your biggest news topics. There are good arguments on each side for static versus variable widths. My intent with the site was to create a statically-sized front page and have real-content pages take advantage of the screen size if they can. Sorry for the miscommunication. --Devon