Fixed width template : would you cross the 800x600 boundary ?

Is there no way to force a browser to refresh or reload its css? It would be much better to simply switch css than to have to refresh the entire page, or redirect to another document.

Any people out there thinking of ’mobilizing’ ModX, i.e. applying it to building mobile websites for devices with screens with many different sizes (and other mobile network-, userface- and browser-related challenges)?

We are working on mobile information services (GPRS/UMTS) and are using ’web 1.0’ CMS-tools for this. ModX may well be our next platform (especially for its AJAX-compatibility which I believe may hav a great impact on the mobile data industry as well). See also this http://opengardensblog.futuretext.com/archives/2006/03/mobile_web_20_a_2.html.

So designing for bigger screens may be an issue but for us radically downsizing for mobile design also is becoming an issue for CMS players!

Nicolaas

Quote from: Nicolaas at Jul 21, 2006, 09:54 AM

Any people out there thinking of ’mobilizing’ ModX, i.e. applying it to building mobile websites for devices with screens with many different sizes (and other mobile network-, userface- and browser-related challenges)?

Some thoughts about this.. Basically you would need to get some terminal class identifying going on. I would suggest to take a look at the WURFL project if you don’t know it allready and it’s php projects. They offer information about mobile devices screensizes based on the User-agent profiles that mobile devices include to their request headers.. They also have some ready made php classes to request WURFL information based on visitors user-agents.

Then when you get the current visitors terminal info, you can decide what template they should get when visiting the site and what content to the template (even separation between WML, CHTML, HTML40, XHTML). And also, depending on the site content and terminal device, some pagination would be nice..

I think this can be achieved with MODx even in it’s current state but when 1.0 arrives, the possibilities to develope this further will be endless..

Note that the WURFL project was just a reference, they have alot of mobile device informations on their database, but it’s still limited. I haven’t really checked how often they update it and how good the coverage is..

i am not a fan of liquid layouts, i find them uncomfortable to read. A happy medium is to have your main content liquid but restricted to a max width.

i use liquid designs , more difficult to design that’s true, but the 1024x768+ users really take profit of their screen
( my liquid design is designed for 1024x768+ users though, below elements overlay ... :s )

according to my google analytics stats, i have 2-3 % of 800x600 users

force 800x600 users to upgrade, i know web designers that could care less about what the majority set the browser size and doesn’t effect their business one bit. Its false to think a client will leave just because of browser size in fact its silly, most people will change if you ask them to it’s not hard to go from 800x600 to 1024x768
geez and I thought web devlopers were the lead by example type guess not lol

If you have an ecommerce site and a visitor with an old 800x600 monitor and they get frustrated from having to constantly shuffle and scroll side to side, you loose sales. Period.

Whether you want to alienate potential customers is entirely up to you. I prefer to make it as easy, convenient and straightforward as possible for them to have the privilege of giving me money.

You can also try to design for 1024 but make it accessible for 800 via max-width (good browsers) and an JS-expression (IE). Look for example at www.modxcms.de and resize to 800 and back to higher resolutions. Imho it´s a good possibility to serve most screen resolutions.

Hopefully I can dodge the flames and get back on topic... Any fans of the jello mold using it with MODx?

Quick Moderator note:

New policy to deal with similar nonsense now implemented. It was that or an outright ban honestly and this is a better solution. You can find the flame fodder referenced to above in a new forum at the bottom of the main forum listing. Time to clean up other similar threads and to shut down nonsense before it spirals out of control. I’m adding that forum to my "ignore boards" list most likely.

:D

Update 2: David had some good, non-flaming points included here:
Quote from: davidm at Aug 11, 2006, 12:38 PM

I don’t believe using a fact based approach to choose a web strategy hardly qualifies as "selling out". In fact, I’d say most freelance webdesigners risk going in business because they have a vision of how they want to work, instead of getting a salary from a web agency and be forced to follow design principles that go against their vision (be it table layouts, rigid web applications, "Flash overdosed" websites, or suck up to clients...). At least that’s the reason I chose this path... I don’t think I am alone there

Now, do I sometimes refuse to work because a client goes against key principles ? Yes, but it all depends on what I have to compromise on : if it’s not essential I sure will compromise (even if I strongly advise against it) and I don’t think that’s selling out, it’s just plain sound reasonning...

Now does this mean "licking their client up and down just to get 5 cents" ? Hell, no. Would the client respect you if you did ? No smart client would ! I hardly feel that limiting yourself to a 800x600 resolution qualifies as "’selling out", when you know 20% of your target audience is at least using this kind of resolution. Of course there might be cases where you know you can use 1024x768 resolution and I’ll have no qualm using it (I even enjoy, since it’s easier !), but only when it’s appropriate ! It’s just plain obvious common sense. What you’re saying is you would advice your clients to tell their own clients to upgrade their screens ?!? That’s funny to the point of being ridiculous, and I’d like to see their faces when you advise them to do that

Most (if not all) of my clients appreciate that I can advise them, including against potential mistakes. More often than not, I am getting contracts because I don’t sell the same soup they get from other contractors, be it freelance or web agencies. If you can explain your choices, rationnally, you’ll be heard 9 out of 10 times even if it means going against what your client think is best for his website.

The FireFox idea is a good example : of course I think most people should drop IE for a standard compliant browser, and I am spreading the word as much as I can but does it mean I’ll consider designing a website which is not IE compatible ? Hell, no, I am not crazy... Even if I don’t like it, I have to take reality into account...