Dynamic vs. Fixed: A Proposal for Peace at the Table
By Molly E. Holzschlag
What happened to table manners? They seem to have dropped down and rolled away like so many undesirable peas, left for the dogs to sniff at and the cats to bat about. The borders have been drawn -- on one side sit the Dynamics, arms crossed, demanding that dynamic table layouts are the only appropriate way to go, ever. Across from them are the Fixed folk, insisting that fixed table layouts are the absolute way to maintain the integrity of a given visual design.
The debate rages on. Is there a right or wrong approach? The Dynamics argue that the entire purpose of the Web is to be accessible, so tables that fill the entire, available screen space are where it's at. The Fixed assert that while indeed, space is always of concern to visual design, the precise placement of elements on a page is what they're desperate to attain.
As any good mom will tell kids battling away at the dinner table, there's no right or wrong answer here. The truth lies somewhere diplomatically in the middle. This month, I'm going to play the Good Mom and propose a method by which we can reach a peace treaty using both dynamic and fixed tables, as well as providing some sensible techniques to address the table debate once and for all.
Resolving the Problem
The crux of the issue can be summed up in one word: resolution. Dynamic and fixed table design arguments center around the fact that people use different computer resolutions when surfing the Web.
