Trillium’s “fixed” width
- 16 November 2007
I swear my next post will be praising Trillium, but this post is to complain about the fixed width of the central content table in the regular layout templates. The center section is supposed to be 608 pixels wide, which is also the size of the “photostrip” that sits atop it.
Add anything bigger than 608 pixels, however, and you will stretch the table beyond the width of the photostrip, giving the page a decidedly unprofessional look:
The above image is from http://graduate.lclark.edu/dept/gseadmit/inforequest.html, but there are many other examples I have found. Many were just a pixel of two too wide and I could quickly fix, though some (like the one above) relate to a form which cannot be edited easily.Another example is the English department at http://www.lclark.edu/dept/english/, which has a wonderful main image stretching the page. The site would lose a lot of charm by reducing the image size.Really the solution is a more fluid layout in which pages can stretch (within reasonable limits) without breaking.
Filed Under
Comments
Morgan,
Thanks for the forward looking, constructive suggestion that brings up the rear on this post. I see that as really quite a helpful way of framing feedback: “For my specific use x, it would be great if the future Trillium would do y.”
A few thoughts on the question of width. As computer screens have increased in size/resolution over the last 5 years, The L&C website template appears narrower and narrower, and in the process of the redesign we will certainly be making our page layouts wider. Also as David outlined nicely in his last comment regarding CSS layout, we are headed towards a brighter future with table-free design.
For anyone interested, to illustrate the continuum of layout possibilities here are a few examples: totally “fixed width” such as Portland State, or Reed, and on the other end of the spectrum totally “liquid”, such as Willamette. To see the contrast change your browser window size while viewing those pages.
Every design choice has it’s benefits and drawbacks, and your suggestion echoes conversations we’ve had as well, so while we have a great deal of work ahead in our assessment phase, I’m looking forward to continuing to put this kind of thinking up for discussion.
![The WhiteBoard [home]](http://www.lclark.edu/global/images/transparent.gif)




