| 4:13 am on May 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
No, Windows is responsible for determining the size of the window when it opens.
| 5:08 am on May 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
The question is.. why do parts of your site require a window thats 740 pixels wide and 10pixels shorter than the available height?
That doesn't sound like good practise to me, people browse in a range of resolutions, with windows set to various different sizes. You should support their choice, not fight it.
| 10:33 am on May 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
hi grahamstewart, i used to offer personal homepages (very similar to blogs, just guestbook-based) that openened in smaller pop-up windows.
with the latest relaunch (proper navigation and some features added) those pages now open in normal browser windows. design is fixed width (would look very nasty in liguid layout) and thousands of my users now complained about the "empty space on the right".
i presented them the above script-solution in a survey and a vast majority was in favour of it.
| 12:12 pm on May 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Resizing an existing browser window is impolite. Resizing an existing browser window to be smaller than it was before also looks stupid.
I suggest finding another solution to the "empty sapce to the right" problem, such as centering your content or allowing background colors to extend farther than you allow text or images to extend.
| 2:04 pm on May 11, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I completely agree with jesserud. Its impolite and not a good way to handle the problem. If you really need it to be 740 pixels wide then why not just put it all in a div that is that wide and then center the div?
Better still use a liquid layout. (why do you say it would look nasty?)
You didn't say why you are resizing the height to 10 pixels less than the available - seems like an odd thing to do.
| 11:43 pm on May 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
centering the content seemed impossibleas we are using absolute positioning in css. found out that that was an error, though. i will consider this and/or background colors that make the empty space not look so nasty.
|Better still use a liquid layout. (why do you say it would look nasty?) |
well, those pages basically are CMS-based private homepages my users can set up in a wide range of ways. whatever layout i use it must look equally good on fully set up as on near-empty pages. a liquid layout on empty pageslooks stupid (lots of empty space on the bottom).
second reason: those pages used to come in pop-up windows of 500px width. the portrait-format of those pages are very tipical and branded - i don't want to change that, would lose recognition.