[Pro] New Pro Dimensions and what's best?

I’m soon to create two more websites. Both will be in standard CSS (blue button) layout. Generally speaking, which height measurement parameter is best to ensure that a page properly grows and/or shrinks?

Fixed height?
Flexible height?
Minimum height?

Many thanks!


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I allways create inline layout deseigns. And (only using) a minimum height can be handy when your site kind of collapses when there is too little content. I do that often, especially when using CMS, you’ll never now what the client is going to insert. That way the DIV’s automatically grows longer when it needs to.

But I can imagine in other cases fixed of flexible height is preferred. When only using a minimum height, the height automatically is kind of flexible from that point.

Richard


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

But I can imagine in other cases fixed of flexible height is preferred. When only using a minimum height, the height automatically is kind of flexible from that point.

Flexible height means, that no height is declared within the stack of css-properties for a div. So these divs need content to have any kind of (browser-calculated) height.

Fixed height as the opposite declares a height which can’t be bigger or smaller than this value.

Both naturally have their sense - depending on the requirements of the layout. So there is no good, better or the best - there is the simple need.

min-height prevents you from collapsing to nil, as Richard already mentioned, but can grow to whatever you want.

max-height can collapse to nil, but never can grow higher the declared max-height.

But I’m pretty sure that you soon got the gist (however it’s not special discussed in the screencast series :slight_smile:

Cheers

Thomas


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Both will be in standard CSS (blue button) layout. Generally speaking, which height measurement parameter is best to ensure that a page properly grows and/or shrinks?

The real crux of the matter is not what page height you have set but whether or not you have an inline construction. It is not enough just have the Blue button on (CSS Layout) - that will only ensure that each item is an individual Div (layer).

An inline layout (Div within Div) will pretty much guarantee that your page will grow correctly but some individual components may require different height settings to ensure that the layout doesn’t have unsightly white space or bunching.

The RPL action will go a long way towards achieving this without much extra thought about construction that can lead to hair loss!

So the answer is that there is no single answer as it will depend on your construction method.

David


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Thanks, everyone. It appears that as increasingly is the case with Freeway, I’ll be spending more time noodling around and field testing what works and what doesn’t. I’m meanwhile also considering going with Weebly through Fatcow. For my immediate needs, that might reduce some hair-pulling on my part, even if it also limits my creativity. There are always tradeoffs.

Laura


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

As soon as you have catched up with the latest developments within Freeway, it’s just a case of keeping up with it. Mostly those who’ve stuck with ‘the old way’ of building static websites are now fighting their way back in the game.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I know! I suspect that the vast majority of users on this forum group are freelancers or have their own businesses, so their ability to keep up with fairly complex additions is part and parcel of their business model. For those of us for whom website building is an occasional element of our job for some company we’re employed by, well, I think it gets a little more tenuous.

Still, over the weekend I purchased Thomas’ screencast series on box model and have studied Ernie’s template. Time is not on my side for these two projects, but I do hope to master inline design eventually — but only when I know I have time to ensure it does NOT constrict my creativity. I’m not a huge fan of strictly modular designs, even if that is the trend. I realize inline can go beyond that, but that’s where the trickier and more time-consuming parts come into play, not to mention the need for a variety of actions and apparently, judging by so many comments on this forum, a fair amount of extended coding.

Bottom line? One day I’ll be there. Right now? No time. Looking in to the RPL action now.

Laura

On 26 Aug 2013, 2:35 pm, Richard van Heukelum wrote:

As soon as you have catched up with the latest developments within Freeway, it’s just a case of keeping up with it. Mostly those who’ve stuck with ‘the old way’ of building static websites are now fighting their way back in the game.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I’m not a huge fan of strictly modular designs…

A box is not a box if you do not make it appear as one. Your design can
still be modular, but needn’t appear so - even with inline design. I often
think of Magritte’s ‘The Treachery of Images’ to remind myself of that.


freewaytalk mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options