Trinity must truly be part of the .1% because 99.9% of web users have screen resolutions at least width of 1024

On 16 October 2014 14:38, Gerhard Zintel <gerhard.zintel@mrs-thomas.de> wrote:
On Thursday 16 October 2014, Calvin Morrison wrote:
> >
> > I could see the benefit for wide screens though. I do not know if there is
> > a possibility to say "not bigger than max width" but reformat if screen is
> > smaller. Might be a compromize.
> >
> > Of course there is a way to do it. It is standard CSS and is relatively
> easy to apply using media queries.  Knowing that this is not only possible,
> but pretty easy, do you still disagree with the functionality of fixed
> width sites? The whole purpose of 'responsive designs' is so that one site
> can be used across many devices with only some changes to css.

My comment was triggered by looking at your mentioned example
> http://pogo.ece.drexel.edu/about.php

I'm not happy with those kind of sites using with smaller screens. I totally agree that having a maximum width could be of benefit depending on the content. But it should reformat at smaller sizes. If this is possible I'm fully satisfied.

Gerhard

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net
For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/
Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting