[mythtv] Time to Vote? (as Re: Official Thread: Mythtv.org Redesign)

Jean-Philippe Steinmetz caskater47 at gmail.com
Wed Jun 6 18:28:50 UTC 2007

> Ok, but given that your "level 2" pages are also mainly text with a menu
> next to it, that the "too bloggish" refered to my first page? Hmmm, not
> sure what to do with that :-)

Yes, obviously there will need to be pages that are mainly text but the
design should be able to adapt. I like your design but im not sure how well
it can adapt to a view that doesn't center on a main section of text. I'd
love to see what you can come up with though for battling this design issue.

> The width of the design would be fixed to best fill a screen of 1024x768
> > resolution (or some other resolution, all the artwork is currently in
> > vector form and easy to resize). When a larger font size is requested,
> > the boxes will not stretch horizontally but will stretch vertically.
> Ok, sounds good. The same is my main reason for leaving the right/bottom
> clear on mine, so screen can be filled (although given that I usually run
> 1600x1200, there might be a useable max-width :-)

Yes, I usually develop the designs to expand out and fill the rest of the
screen, but not the actual content. The content will always have a fixed max
width. So you don't end up with only white space. Examples of this method
are pidgin.im, k12.usc.edu, metro.net, windowsvista.com, etc.

> The scrollbars would appear for the entire page.
> But wouldn't that move your menu out of view?

The design is built to accommodate a screen resolution of 1024x768 including
extra space required by browsers with a bloated UI. So the menu should not
be out of view on this screen and certainly not on anything bigger. On a
very small screen (800x600) it would be out of view, yes. The design can be
done with a range for min and max width. The range of width may be 800x600
to 1024x768 but often that is unnecessary. Most screens are bigger than
800x600 these days and making the boxes scale in width requires grid-9
slicing (does CSS support that yet?) or actually cutting up the images into
several pieces and placing them into a table (which I have done successfully
many times before, its just a pain in the ass).

> I don't believe CSS supports gradient backgrounds (yet) so this will have
> > to be an image.
> You might get away with stretching the background image vertically, but
> then not all boxes would have the same gradient. All depends on the
> gradient range I guess.
>         Herman

I could stretch the gradient but doing so on a very long page would lose the
effect when the page is first viewed (before they scroll down) and I want to
avoid that. I could easily use the same gradient for the full screen version
and the half screen version though and simply have that stretch, just not
have it stretch when the box goes longer than a full screen view (1024x768).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-dev/attachments/20070606/dd043de5/attachment.htm 

More information about the mythtv-dev mailing list