There’s a few different ways to attack this.
First of all, height is completely (or nearly) irrelevant. You have to
set some height in Freeway, otherwise you end up out of pasteboard
to place more content as you add it, but the height of the page that’s
published will be reduced to the height of your actual content.
Try this: make a new blank page that’s 2500px tall (or any number much
taller than your browser window). Scroll down to the 1,000px vertical
position (look in the ruler on the left of your design screen) and
draw a small purple box. Now preview in a browser. Even though you
made your “page” 25,000 px tall, you will only ever be able to scroll
down to the 1,000px + height of your box point, and that’s the end of
the scroll.
Secondly, width should be driven by the type of content you are
showing. For example, text with line-length greater than 10 - 15
average words at your default font size will be extraordinarily tiring
to read beyond a couple of paragraphs. If you are publishing long-form
text, pay careful attention to this rule. If you find yourself having
to split your content into multiple columns in order to follow this
rule, then consider making your page itself narrower. Even in this day
and age where 27" monitors are considered “normal”, remember that many
people still like to read comfortably, and you will do well to honor
that if you expect them to carry on beyond the “above the fold”
portion of your page.
If you are showing photographs, then consider the file-size FORCED by
large images. It’s a fact of physics that an image that is twice as
wide (and proportionally enlarged) has four times as many pixels, and
thus considerably larger file-size. Using Carousel effects does not
exempt you from this, it just hides the problem off-screen. The only
way to present large images without causing the visitor to leave your
site out of sheer impatience is to lazy-load the images from disk, as
in a Showcase or ScriptyLightbox slide show. Which gets me back to the
idea that having an enormous grid of thumbnail images on your extra-
wide page just introduces overload and user confusion – and dilutes
and diminishes the impact of each of the images on display. Think
about the (IRL) galleries you like – do they show all the pictures
crammed onto one wall, or do they have a rhythm and pacing and plenty
of “white space” to give each image its due?
For the longest time, well after it was fashionable, I was a strong
proponent of centered 750-wide pages. With a good background image
(tiling) strategy, you can make a visually interesting composition
that still centers the visitor’s attention and makes the content
shine. I have made some sites recently that approach 960px, and that’s
gaining traction as the “new 750”, but I feel as though it encourages
multi-column layouts and other unfriendly tactics that end up tiring
the eye.
All this (except the line-length bit – that’s extremely well-
researched) is my opinion. Your content and your design ethos must be
the driver of this decision. At a technical level, a page CAN be any
size, but you should pick at least a width and stick to it, and be
cognizant of the trade-offs you are working through as you design the
result. And be sure to test on a wide range of computers/OSs/browsers
to test your assumptions. If you only ever see it on your latest-model
Mac, you are seeing a vanishingly small slice of the pie. The more you
know about your audience, and what kind of computers (and connection
speeds) they enjoy, the more informed this choice can be.
Walter
On Jul 25, 2011, at 8:10 PM, Duncan Fowler wrote:
I am a new guy to Freeway and would appreciate wisdom on setting
page width.
freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options