[WEB4LIB] Pixel sizes for web pages

[Thomas Dowling]

You may want to consult the Web4Lib archive for comments from the last
few merry go-rounds on this topic.

You asked for opinions; you can decide for yourself whether these are
learned:

    Monitor size in inches is different from monitor size in pixels,
    which is different from window size in pixels, which is different
    from the rendered size of a browser's default font.  Not only are
    these four measurements different, they operate almost wholly
    independently of each other.  So a statement like "I have trouble
    reading text at 600x800" puts the blame in the wrong place.

    HTML inherently has no sense of screen or window dimensions.  Many
    web designers will argue that the only aspects to a page with fixed
    pixel dimensions should be inline images; such designers typically
    restrain their use of images so that no single image or horizontal
    chain of images is wider than, say, 550px (with obvious exceptions
    for sites like image archives where the main purpose of a page is
    to display a larger image).  Outside of images, find ways to
    express measurments relative to window size (percentages) or
    relative to text size (ems).

    Users detest horizontal scrolling.

    In my experience, users with higher screen resolutions and/or
    larger monitors are less likely to run any application full screen;
    average window size on a 1280x1024 19" or 21" monitor is very
    likely to be less than 800px wide.  (The browser window I currently
    have open is 587px wide and 737px high.)

    I applaud your decision to support Web access for the visually
    impaired.  Since that entails much, much more than monitor
    resolution, I trust the people actually writing your pages are
    familiar with the Web Content Accessibilty Guidelines.

    It is actually possible to design web sites that are equally
    usable, even equally beautiful, under a wide range of viewing
    conditions.  Failing to accomplish that completely is
    understandable; failing to identify it as a goal is not.


My recommendations to your committee would be A) find a starting point
that isn't tied up in presentational nitpicking; B) find a design that
looks attractive anywhere from 550 to 1550 pixels wide; C) crank up
both your workstations' resolution and font size; and D) continue to
run your browsers in windows that are approximately 600 to 640 pixels
wide.



Thomas Dowling
OhioLINK - Ohio Library and Information Network
tdowling at ohiolink.edu


----- Original Message -----
From: Barbara Brattin <bbrattin at wnpl.alibrary.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <web4lib at webjunction.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 1999 5:16 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!
>
>
>