responsive web design

[StevenWWinters]

Frank,

I think the jury's still out on this one. I really wasn't paying attention to RWD until the post on the market trends. I think there's a valid point there.

However, I'm not sure all sites would convert well. For example, I while back I did a makeover of a very image heavy site from a fluid layout (this was way before RWD) to a fixed width layout. This was a site for high end custom built furniture. Not only was the new site visually more appealing, it was easier to navigate and didn't change how many images were displayed (width-wise) as the browser was re-sized. I find that on very large monitors, too many columns is more confusing than just a few with more rows that are scrolled. The site owner agreed and was happy with the result. It displays fine on a tablet, at least one the size of an iPad3. And, I'm not sure how likely someone looking for pricey, high end custom furniture is to be using a smart phone to find what they want.

So, I think the answer may be, it depends... on the nature of the content and the target audience. For less image intensive applications, I think the responsive web design may have real value, especially where it is more likely to be viewed on a smartphone or iPod size device.

[csehz]

If you need a mobile version then design a mobile version. It does not make sense to sacrifice what you would normally have in a browser version and it is overkill to expect someone with a mobile connection to wait to download your browser version. Create a mobile and a browser version. Sledger has a good script somewhere to redirect your visitors to the mobile site if they come in with a smart phone. And if you design your site judiciously it will look good and be functional on a tablet.

Yes that is a solution, but as a customer, that directs me rather away from that format of the site. The mobile version used to be typically restricted in some functions or just simply strangely/newly look, like the default facebook on the tablet. My first reaction was immediately to wishing that one, which to accustomed on the PC. But of course everybody is different

[magelyranking]

HI sledger, would you mind share your script for redirecting mobile thks in advance
Jacques

[Citywolf]

Agreed. This is a marketing decision, not a technical or design decision. At last survey, 40%+ of all internet access was mobile (phone, tablet.) If you want that market then you use the program or design the site to make that easy for your customers. If your site is for family pictures, then you can ignore alternate formats.

As to Xara being a WYSIWYG, that is the developer's choice. But, if the company begins to lose sales because its customers seek RWD features, then maybe it will be worth a rewrite. I don't think that is the case with Xara. Those companies just wanting a web presence have too many cookie-cutter options to be bothered with learning a software. Xara is perfect for the small to mid-sized company with a one or two person marketing staff responsible for a web and print presence. I have used it since 94 for that very reason. Draw once and use everywhere. IMHO.

[pauland]

Responsive Web Design for Xara users is probably one of those things people wish for but would hate as soon as their wish came true.

[slavelle]

If you need a mobile version then design a mobile version.

That was a fine attitude until about a year ago. With RWD becoming more mainstream, it's getting less common/popular to do the separate mobile site.

We generate mostly Joomla! sites these days and all the newest ones we've done are responsive. The same content can be delivered to the right size and automatically flow its info. To create an individual "small screen" site would be nice if there weren't 10 different sizes out there, plus the portrait vs. landscape versions of those. It's just not practical to design that many possibilities to make sure your site is appropriate for all browser sizes.

In Responsive, the content of the site can stay the same, and the back end determines what parts should be loaded (or not) according to the size, so you can really specify at a pretty granular level whether to include that big background image, whether a slider component (or whatever) should show at a small size, etc.

I don't anticipate Xara sites to go the responsive way just because of the nature of the way they are created and output - there wouldn't be an easy way I can think of to design something without the "code" aspect to automatically know how to deal with itself, unless it were done with something like wierd uses of the Name of objects or something.

Just a few thoughts.

[pauland]

Designing a separate mobile site in Xara is a good solution if you don't wish to become one with HTML/CSS or take up template customisation.

It's a misconception to imagine that people are building one site when they use responsive techniques, they are building a site that changes according to various criteria - often screen size, so you still have to design for multiple screen sizes, it's just that it's done in the same code.

It would be interesting to hear from all the people clamouring for Xara to be a responsive web designer, to explain how they could do that. Just how would that work?

Responsive web design isn't WYSIWYG design, so it's a real challenge for Xara.

Jimi said As for mobile phones, I rarely look at sites on them. Once you're over 50 I think one just says stuff it. I'll wait until later and view it on something where I don't have to squint.

Jimi made a great point - any site that requires squinting, sure as heck wasn't designed for the platform it's being viewed upon and would benefit from a design that suits the platform form factor, whether that's a responsive design or a separate mobile site.

[Big Frank]

ok here's a very very rough and unpolished thought
you select "web document" and you get a dialog that says "do you want to do a mobile at site at the same time"
if you say yes you get two pages side by side, one for desktop size, one for the current "average" mobile width (not an easy choice but let's say there is one)
you design your desktop side and you drag and drop your essential mobile elements from the desktop to the mobile side
every new page created follows the same convention as above
when you're finished the preview gives you two views side by side
then when you export it automatically creates a js or php or htaccess solution to do a mobile detect with maybe a cookie to prevent looping
and the export puts the mobile in a subdirectory or a subdomain as required
its not perfect by any means
but it's a start and gets people thinking about accessibility for mobile devices
the mobile web market is exploding
those of us in web design are feeling the pressure
every single client this year has in one way or another asked me about this
having a solution to hand is better than not having one at all
those movie makers who said talkies would never take off lost everything
i do my best to design for end users but when it comes down to it i'm designing for the people who pay the bills

[pauland]

BF your idea is a good one, I think.

It's not responsive, but a way of making it easier for people to create multiple sites for different resolutions but keep the designs together.

I have a feeling I've seen a similar thing with some existing software, but can't remember where.

It's a mystery to me that Xara hasn't included a mobile switch feature already.

[Cloud]

Paul, you may have seen it in Adobe Muse, that has a very similar capability, you tell the software that you also want a mobile site it create the pages optimised for the mobile. It creates the master pages and converts backgrounds etc and you then decide which elements you want to keep and it resizes them appropriately and when publishing it publishes both sites and sets up the code.