Hi all, I am developing a website and was wondering how i would go about ensuring my site is compatible with most screen resolutions. Any ideas? I am using Frontpage (and am not particularly clued-up on coding.

Any ideas welcome. Cheers.

With my latest design I had it designed fixed width at 1000 width. I ditched 800x600 resolutions as that resolution was less than 5% of my user base. I also have a fluid version of the same skin that has a minimum width of 1000px as well but will fill up any larger resolutions.

Additionally, you could work with a fluid design (I've never used Frontpage).

bells123,
These days, if you want a fixed-width design, meaning the site will look identical on all browsers, in terms of table widths, image widths, etc. then go with a 1000 pixel wide design. On higher/wider resolutions, such as most new laptops, the design should be centered and the background of the page will fill in the blank space on either side of the site.

You could also use a fluid design which deals with percentages of tables, cells, rows, etc. This expands to the percent of the browser window (so your biggest table could be 100% wide, which would expand to take up the entire width of the browser, on all resolutions.

Either way, Frontpage makes it easy for you to change the width of cells and everything.

Matt

You could also use a fluid design which deals with percentages of tables, cells, rows, etc.

Sorry, but tables should NOT be used for layout at all. Step into the 21st century and learn to use CSS for controlling layouts. Percentages work the same way with CSS!

Originally Posted by LadynRed

Sorry, but tables should NOT be used for layout at all. Step into the 21st century and learn to use CSS for controlling layouts. Percentages work the same way with CSS!

The ongoing controversy...

Don't wish to start up this argument once again.

Matt

Even if we did, there'd by only one winner

Ok, well for the record, I do agree that CSS is the future, significantly more powerful than tables, and I use CSS extensively. I just also think that tables does the job with relative ease, and I think it's easier to learn HTML/tables, THEN learn CSS, rather than going straight to CSS, ESPECIALLY, since he is using Frontpage. That's just a personal opinion and preference and I do not wish to continue this argument and ruin the thread.

My apologies,
Matt

Ok, well for the record, I do agree that CSS is the future

I disagree. CSS is not the future. It is the present. Well structured HTML with CSS for layout is necessary for doing advanced layout with a modern fit. It is not about being "trendy", CSS is simply a better way of doing layout. Anyone that is stuck using tables, my best advice is to learn as much about CSS as possible. All of the best Javascript libraries rely on well structured HTML in order to function. Box model layouts load more smoothly, styles are cached by the browser, and the code is less bloated and more efficient. How many more reasons do we need?