Ok, my golf blog (link in signature) has a variable width. It is kind of cool, but sometimes when there are images the varibale width makes some things strange. Like the images extend outside the tables. It is a CSS thing I haven't been able to figure out yet. But the main question of the post is this: Check it out and tell me wether you like the current variable width, or prefer a fixed size. I've got a sponsor lined up for a center banner and I've told them the size is 400px wide. But that is the minimum width. With VW, it could be much larger. I'm starting to wonder if having fixed widths would make all banners and layouts more consistent. If you think fixed is better, what size? Any other opinions or ideas are welcomed!
I've gone from fixed, to variable, and now back to fixed. You just have so much more control over the way things look. And you can find that some websites fall appart when looking on a higher res screen. My notebook outputs to 1900x1200, so some sites look way too stretched. But my resolution isn't exactly standard. But having a fixed width gives a much nicer look to the text, gives you some nice image/text wrap options, and so on. It's also a LOT easier to design for. It's annoying to have to always build in a stretchable graphic. Just MHO. I'm sure there are people on both sides. Brian