Pixel sizes for web pages

[Jonathan Woltz]

The important question to ask is, "What information is going to be on the
web page that *needs* to be presented at 800x600?"  Frankly, good web page
design doesn't require 800x600. Web designers who make 800x600 pages are
often doing it for the wrong reasons:  they fill the page with big photos
and other eye candy, or they fill the page with huge lists of hyperlinks.
Neither makes a site that's easy for patrons to use.

I test my library's pages to be sure that they work equally well at 640x480
and 800x600. The monitors in our library are set to 800x600, but it's
important that our pages work well for patrons outside the library with less
capable hardware. There's no benefit to the library in alienating patrons
just because they have old computers.

: Jonathan Woltz, Automation Librarian
: Southwestern Oklahoma State University, Weatherford, OK 73096
: E-mail: woltzj at swosu.edu  Phone: (580)774-7074  Fax: (580)774-3112
: http://www.swosu.edu/library/


----- Original Message -----
From: Barbara Brattin <bbrattin at wnpl.alibrary.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <web4lib at webjunction.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 1999 4:16 PM
Subject: [WEB4LIB] Pixel sizes for web pages


> We have an escalating argument within our home page committee which will
> only be resolved by gathering learned opinions. Therefore, I come to you
> for learned opinions. We are developing a new and improved web site as a
> team. Some team members believe very strongly that the pages should be
> created to be viewed within the 800x600 pixel setting. Their argument is,
> the higher resolution is becoming a standard for commercial sites. Along
> with this argument, they request that all monitors within the library be
> set to this resolution. Frankly, I find this resolution to be bordering on
> hard to read, and I have 20/20 vision. The other side says, there are few
> times when we encounter a web page where we have to scroll right to left
to
> see the contents (Infotrac is the main offender)  and seeing that we are
> concerned with visually challenged patron access, why would we reduce the
> font size for the few times that we need to adjust? They claim that
800x600
> is not the new standard, and that 640x480 is where we should be.  I'm
> interested in hearing from all you webmasters- what size pixel are you
> designing your pages for? Why? Does anyone really know what the new
> standard is? Thanks for your help!
>
>