On the Resolution of Screens the Liquid Web Design and Static Web Design
I have met frequently in the position of having to choose between adequately covers all possible resolutions and losing accuracy, or fit a couple or three of them being able to design exactly as you imagine it or drawing on paper. I think many other designers novice like me will have been seen in such circumstances, and although it is not easy to develop a universal rule, at least pretend to explain the advantages and disadvantages here that I see over and over how to design.
At present, the computer is an essential part of our life, enables us to obtain results that hardly get in another way. And to be so important, computing is evolving at a rapid speed in most cases we can not fit. NEVER be able to have the latest system software, the latest software, there will always be some piece of our team that this outdated, even for a few days or few months. It is clear that the main reason is our pocket, but we must also think that not everyone has the time and / or the knowledge needed to keep up.
Why do I say this? It's simple, I intend to say that based on these circumstances, not everyone has the same monitor, in the same browser or the same programs, and this hinders the form of design. In this article I will focus on some of the biggest problems of the current web design: Unlike the resolutions. As we do not know how many pixels will have wide web, we do not know who put the size of our design. This issue divides how to design in two: the design liquid, which is suited to all possible resolutions, or the static design, which can only bring two or three.
Liquid web design
The idea of the design is based on liquid that measures of the components of the web are related, that is, having sizes percentage. If you put a table width as 100%, that table will have a width of 800 pixels resolution if the computer is 800x600, or 1024 pixels of resolution if the computer is 1024x768 pixels, and thus with all resolutions. Similarly, if we put a 50% size, the slab measured half the width of the resolution.
It would seem that this form of design is the panacea for all our problems, but obviously not the case. And this is not the case for many reasons: think of an image, the size has to be absolute, therefore we can not make that image occupies the entire width of the screen; what if that image is the "top", which is logo, which also has static measures, and where there is a Pad of a certain width? There are tricks to solve certain parts of the problem, I will discuss later, but I think the idea of the design liquid and its main problem have been made clear.
Static web design
The idea of static design is based on the components of the Web have absolute measurements. That is, we'll give you a width in pixels to anything, whether table, image, form field ... In this way, and taking into account that most of the designers distribute the elements of your web pages using tables or CSS divisions, we have a system that allows us to be precise, will always know where each element, because the resolution will not make change its position.
But of course, not everything was going to be good, if you stop to think a little, it is clear that with this system we chose the width in pixels on our page, and of course, if you make a webpage of 800 pixels wide and someone has a resolution smaller, you have to use the odious horizontal scroll bar, and if your resolution is bigger, you see a small page. Usually the people who design this way, make their web pages with a size between 740 and 755 pixels wide, to understand, adapt to the resolution of 800x600 and thus the page looks good in resolutions of 800x600 and 1024x768, which are the most used according to the statistics.
One possible solution, web design mixed
One possible solution to alleviate the problems of earlier forms; the design is mixed, but still is far from a panacea. Is to mix the two forms of design, to achieve an outcome that is compatible with all resolutions and has a minimum of accuracy. Imagine that we want to make a kind web portal, so typical, two menus, one on each side and the content in the middle: Well, we can take action is likely to menus, and on the center, for example, we can put 100 pixels wide Each menu, and the downtown area 100%. That way each menu would be 100 pixels wide and the central area would take the rest of the screen size. For example in a resolution of 800x600 pixels each menu would have 100 and the central area would have 600, and in 1024 the menus would have 100 pixels and the central area would have 824 (measures of the central area are well placed to simplify the way, but we should always Remove the width of the vertical scroll bar, and one more thing that takes the browser).
But this system remains a problem, we still do not know the exact size of the central area, because it varies with each resolution, and therefore we still lack precision.
The big decision seen from different points of view
The first method is almost impossible to do, because unless you have only text, it is practically impossible to provide measures for everything. So compare the system is mixed with static system. Those who defend the mixed system, saying that they do have to respect all users by giving them facilities to view the contents of your site the same way that the whole world, it's about giving equal opportunity to all. Whoever defends the method is based on the statistics, saying it prefers to give the best of himself to an 80% or more people (anything anyone can view a site, but have to use the horizontal scroll bar), which give a worse result at 100% of people. If we neither look coldly nor are like Web pages with different browsers or with different plug-ins. “It’s essentially seek a balance between accessibility and design. It also has much to do the kind of site you are going to design, because you will not in the same way for a web of technology that for a comedy. And as always the best you can do is to design according to your own experience and seeing many, many websites, to learn different methods, different designs and different ways of reaching the public... by Web design India
At present, the computer is an essential part of our life, enables us to obtain results that hardly get in another way. And to be so important, computing is evolving at a rapid speed in most cases we can not fit. NEVER be able to have the latest system software, the latest software, there will always be some piece of our team that this outdated, even for a few days or few months. It is clear that the main reason is our pocket, but we must also think that not everyone has the time and / or the knowledge needed to keep up.
Why do I say this? It's simple, I intend to say that based on these circumstances, not everyone has the same monitor, in the same browser or the same programs, and this hinders the form of design. In this article I will focus on some of the biggest problems of the current web design: Unlike the resolutions. As we do not know how many pixels will have wide web, we do not know who put the size of our design. This issue divides how to design in two: the design liquid, which is suited to all possible resolutions, or the static design, which can only bring two or three.
Liquid web design
The idea of the design is based on liquid that measures of the components of the web are related, that is, having sizes percentage. If you put a table width as 100%, that table will have a width of 800 pixels resolution if the computer is 800x600, or 1024 pixels of resolution if the computer is 1024x768 pixels, and thus with all resolutions. Similarly, if we put a 50% size, the slab measured half the width of the resolution.
It would seem that this form of design is the panacea for all our problems, but obviously not the case. And this is not the case for many reasons: think of an image, the size has to be absolute, therefore we can not make that image occupies the entire width of the screen; what if that image is the "top", which is logo, which also has static measures, and where there is a Pad of a certain width? There are tricks to solve certain parts of the problem, I will discuss later, but I think the idea of the design liquid and its main problem have been made clear.
Static web design
The idea of static design is based on the components of the Web have absolute measurements. That is, we'll give you a width in pixels to anything, whether table, image, form field ... In this way, and taking into account that most of the designers distribute the elements of your web pages using tables or CSS divisions, we have a system that allows us to be precise, will always know where each element, because the resolution will not make change its position.
But of course, not everything was going to be good, if you stop to think a little, it is clear that with this system we chose the width in pixels on our page, and of course, if you make a webpage of 800 pixels wide and someone has a resolution smaller, you have to use the odious horizontal scroll bar, and if your resolution is bigger, you see a small page. Usually the people who design this way, make their web pages with a size between 740 and 755 pixels wide, to understand, adapt to the resolution of 800x600 and thus the page looks good in resolutions of 800x600 and 1024x768, which are the most used according to the statistics.
One possible solution, web design mixed
One possible solution to alleviate the problems of earlier forms; the design is mixed, but still is far from a panacea. Is to mix the two forms of design, to achieve an outcome that is compatible with all resolutions and has a minimum of accuracy. Imagine that we want to make a kind web portal, so typical, two menus, one on each side and the content in the middle: Well, we can take action is likely to menus, and on the center, for example, we can put 100 pixels wide Each menu, and the downtown area 100%. That way each menu would be 100 pixels wide and the central area would take the rest of the screen size. For example in a resolution of 800x600 pixels each menu would have 100 and the central area would have 600, and in 1024 the menus would have 100 pixels and the central area would have 824 (measures of the central area are well placed to simplify the way, but we should always Remove the width of the vertical scroll bar, and one more thing that takes the browser).
But this system remains a problem, we still do not know the exact size of the central area, because it varies with each resolution, and therefore we still lack precision.
The big decision seen from different points of view
The first method is almost impossible to do, because unless you have only text, it is practically impossible to provide measures for everything. So compare the system is mixed with static system. Those who defend the mixed system, saying that they do have to respect all users by giving them facilities to view the contents of your site the same way that the whole world, it's about giving equal opportunity to all. Whoever defends the method is based on the statistics, saying it prefers to give the best of himself to an 80% or more people (anything anyone can view a site, but have to use the horizontal scroll bar), which give a worse result at 100% of people. If we neither look coldly nor are like Web pages with different browsers or with different plug-ins. “It’s essentially seek a balance between accessibility and design. It also has much to do the kind of site you are going to design, because you will not in the same way for a web of technology that for a comedy. And as always the best you can do is to design according to your own experience and seeing many, many websites, to learn different methods, different designs and different ways of reaching the public... by Web design India
Source...