<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rehashing the Fixed vs. Liquid Width Debate</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/resources/web-design/rehashing-the-fixed-vs-liquid-width-debate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/resources/web-design/rehashing-the-fixed-vs-liquid-width-debate/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 22:51:17 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tommy Olsson</title>
		<link>http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/resources/web-design/rehashing-the-fixed-vs-liquid-width-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-23349</link>
		<dc:creator>Tommy Olsson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 13:08:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.notesondesign.net/web-design/rehashing-the-fixed-vs-liquid-width-debate/#comment-23349</guid>
		<description>A pure liquid layout can cause almost as much usability problems as a fixed-width layout. As with most other things in life, the ideal is often somewhere in the middle, not at the extremes.

A constrained liquid/elastic hybrid is what I've found works best for most content-rich sites. A navigation column and/or sidebar that is elastic ("fixed" width specified in em) plus a liquid main content column. Then you assign a max-width to curb the problems with overly long lines of text, and perhaps a min-width to prevent the content column from collapsing in extremely narrow viewports.

The min-width and max-width properties aren't supported in IE6 and older, but this behaviour can degrade gracefully. Specify an em-based width in an IE style sheet, and use Microsoft's proprietary expression() syntax to emulate min-width and max-width for the majority that has client-side scripting enabled.

Of course there are sites that will work best with a rigid fixed-width layout and sites that will work best in a pure liquid layout, but those are quite rare.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A pure liquid layout can cause almost as much usability problems as a fixed-width layout. As with most other things in life, the ideal is often somewhere in the middle, not at the extremes.</p>
<p>A constrained liquid/elastic hybrid is what I&#8217;ve found works best for most content-rich sites. A navigation column and/or sidebar that is elastic (&#8221;fixed&#8221; width specified in em) plus a liquid main content column. Then you assign a max-width to curb the problems with overly long lines of text, and perhaps a min-width to prevent the content column from collapsing in extremely narrow viewports.</p>
<p>The min-width and max-width properties aren&#8217;t supported in IE6 and older, but this behaviour can degrade gracefully. Specify an em-based width in an IE style sheet, and use Microsoft&#8217;s proprietary expression() syntax to emulate min-width and max-width for the majority that has client-side scripting enabled.</p>
<p>Of course there are sites that will work best with a rigid fixed-width layout and sites that will work best in a pure liquid layout, but those are quite rare.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jermayn Parker</title>
		<link>http://www.NotesOnDesign.net/resources/web-design/rehashing-the-fixed-vs-liquid-width-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-23269</link>
		<dc:creator>Jermayn Parker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Sep 2007 07:57:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.notesondesign.net/web-design/rehashing-the-fixed-vs-liquid-width-debate/#comment-23269</guid>
		<description>great article!
I think alot of it depends on the actual website, as each website is different.

You can use min-width with divs, p tags etc and while it does not work in IE (you can use a hack) it does mean you do not have to read a sentence over 1200px.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>great article!<br />
I think alot of it depends on the actual website, as each website is different.</p>
<p>You can use min-width with divs, p tags etc and while it does not work in IE (you can use a hack) it does mean you do not have to read a sentence over 1200px.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
