RE: Screen Resolution

It's an English phrase.  The Man on the Clapham Omnibus is just like The Man
in the Street.  He's a fictional, average, normal person.  A Joe Public.

What I mean is that we can never foresee exactly how our sites will look to
all of our visitors, so we have to design with the average vistor in mind.

For example, The Man on the Clapham Omnibus might surf with the following
settings: 800*600, IE5 maximised, Win98, 16bit colour, medium font size,
Java enabled, cookies enabled, JavaScript 1.2 enabled.

Tim




> -----Original Message-----
> From: H. G. Quinn [mailto:hgquinn(at)attglobal.net]
> Sent: 25 February 2000 13:20
> To: tim booker
> Subject: Re: Screen Resolution
>
>
> Who or what is "the Man on the Clapham Omnibus"?
>
> tim booker wrote:
>
> > Scott,
> >
> > Of course you cannot please all the people all the time.  I
> have never
> > claimed to be able to.
> >
> > I would be the first to admit that we must design sites for
> The Man on the
> > Clapham Omnibus, not his mate who views everything in 18pt Verdana.
> >
> > The original discussion was about screen resolution, not
> font sizes.  The
> > fact remains that a Web site can be made to look good on
> all resolutions.
> > True, it might sometimes involve blank space or scrolling,
> but something
> > like that is almost unavoidable.  A good looking Web site
> might still be one
> > that has some blank space or a scrollbar.
> >
> > Of course "looking good" is a matter of perspective.  But
> what are designers
> > for, anyway?  Perhaps we should all adopt the following
> philosophy: "My mate
> > views everything at 18pt Verdana, so I'm not even going to
> attempt to make
> > my site look good".
> >
> > Web isn't print.  I agree.  It is because we are working
> with a much more
> > flexible medium that we must adopt a new style of design: a
> style of design
> > in which we can not always predict the appearance of the page to the
> > visitor.  The design of a good Web page, therefore,
> requires a high degree
> > of maturity and cunning.  It can be very difficult, but it is not
> > impossible.  Thus the great divide between professional and
> amateur design.
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org
> > > [mailto:owner-hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org]On Behalf Of Scott Bowling
> > > Sent: 24 February 2000 18:21
> > > To: hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org
> > > Subject: Re: Screen Resolution
> > >
> > >
> > > Elizabeth Fuller wrote:
> > > >
> > > > tim booker wrote:
> > > > > I get severely irritated when I visit a page at
> 1600*1200 and am
> > > > > confronted with a column of text that has expanded to
> > > something like
> > > > > 1500 pixels wide!
> > > >
> > > > Tim, I agree with you completely, and have no desire at
> all to ever
> > > > read a line of text that's 17" long or more on my
> screen.  Thus, I,
> > > > too, think it's a good idea to limit line length for
> maximum user
> > > > comfort at all resolutions.
> > > >
> > > Limit the line length to what? And how? There's only so much
> > > you can do,
> > > after all. If you limit line length, then people with
> wider display
> > > settings are going to see white space, irritating at least
> > > some of them
> > > (and does a half-screen of emptiness really look "good").
> And if the
> > > design sets things up anticipating an 800x600 (realizing that not
> > > everyone sets their browser to full scree, of course),
> then the line
> > > length limits will likely cause horizontal scrolling at 640x480.
> > >
> > > I suppose it's been well covered at this point, but I don't recall
> > > seeing anyone mention another potential problem. It's the
> viewers that
> > > ultimately have control over their metrics, including default
> > > font style
> > > and size. I know of at least one Web designer who uses a
> > > display setting
> > > of 1024x768 but has the default font set to Verdana at
> 18pt. Makes a
> > > huge difference in displayed text in terms of words per line.
> > >
> > > Bottom line is that the Web isn't print. Deal.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Designing a page that looks good on all resolutions
> is a case of
> > > > > intelligent, mature design techniques.
> > > >
> > > Yes, certainly. However, the fuzzy "looks good" is
> generally more a
> > > matter of subjective rather than objective elements.
> > >
> > > How then to ensure that *all* viewers are accomodated,
> given all the
> > > variance between platforms, settings and viewer tastes?
> > >
> > > The only thought I've had is to provide a viewer control
> panel that
> > > allows for specifying preferences, storing the configuration
> > > in a cookie
> > > with maybe something server-side. But then the site would
> have to be
> > > generated dynamically, using templates with a twist or something.
> > >
> > > Any solid advice or ideas on how to perform this magic of
> producing
> > > sites that "look good" for all?
> > >
> > > Just wondering,
> > >
> > > Scott Bowling
> > > scottbff(at)erols.com
> > >
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Heather Quinn
> hgquinn(at)attglobal.net
> http://pws.prserv.net/windyhill
>
>
>

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA