Redesign concept

Jeroen Coumans jeroen at
Wed Nov 12 02:59:40 PST 2003

Hi Greg Schafer. You said the following on 11/11/03 23:17:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 07:39:52PM +0100, Jeroen Coumans wrote:
>>Yeah I know, the current design is barely a couple of months old, 
>>consider this a refinement (also based on the discussion with Bill some 
>>time age):
> <snip>
> Waaay too much wasted screen real estate on the right hand side of the
> screen. Agree wih other comment about the colors not contrasting enough.

I expected people would protest if I fix the width of the content. 
Nevertheless, it should be more readable for people with bad eyes 
because lines aren't as long. The current "width: 70%; min-width: 30em; 
max-width: 50em;" is specifically tailored for optimal readability.

> Using Firebird 0.6.1 at 1280x960

Especially on large resolutions this should improve readability... 
Anyway, currently changed it to a fluid layout so you can see the 
difference. Note how your eyes are more strained after reading a long 
page with fluid width.
BTW I'm not making this up, it's all based on studies and articles from 
experienced designers.

>>IE has no hope to function with this menu implementation short of javascript 
>>additions, which means adjusting all html. I'm considering some 
> Say what? Making it unworkable with IE would be a mistake.

All content will always be accessible in all browsers. Like I said, this 
is just a concept. If people like the menu, I can implement it for IE 
too, and can probably work around bugs in other browsers. It will 
require markup changes though, which is why I asked here first.
I am planning to take advantage of Mozilla/Opera/Konquerors' advanced 
features which aren't available in IE though (like PNG's with 
alpha-channel). This means that IE users would still see a nice site, 
but better browsers would see a great site.

> Looks nice otherwise.

Thanks for your comments

Jeroen Coumans (jeroen at
FAQ and Website Maintainer

More information about the website mailing list