[RFC] Define max-width for prosilver

[aleha]

I am opening this for comments after a brief discussion on IRC.

Browsing phpBB 3.1 (or olympus) from a 21", 22", 23" or 24+" monitor really tires the eyes because there is no max-width for the pages, that is the pages stretch to end of the screen.
There is a ticket in tracker and [WIP]PR on github. If you look at the tracker comments there is some discussion for the exact details on what the max-width should be, e.g. 940px, 960px, padding etc.

I am no UI guy to know what's best, so if we won't have a fixed max-width hardcoded in the style, then this could be an ACP option for enabling/disabling and setting the max-width value. Alternatively, if this won't go to 3.1 core, we should have an extension for it.

To see what I am talking about, if you don't have a wide screen, go to http://www.dimensionstoolkit.com as proposed and try a custom Area51 page, e.g. a topic with a few posts and a width of e.g. 1200

PS: You can delete this post of mine as this is a major change and needs its own topic.

[nickvergessen]

... so if we won't have a fixed max-width hardcoded in the style, then this could be an ACP option for enabling/disabling and setting the max-width value.

Definetly a "No" here. We have way too many ACP options already. And styling your board should not be a configuration option.

[callumacrae]

I don't understand why there is so much discussion around such a simple and obvious change.

[hanakin]

Nor do I also per the size debates I will post exact numbers later for all the different options but the baseline should be 948px + outer padding. This way we adhere to the. Rule of thirds

[tbackoff]

I agree having a max-width. Maybe then we can revert the change about the last post column that made it so small.

[callumacrae]

This way we adhere to the. Rule of thirds

Either you don't know what that means, or I don't know what that means. I'm pretty sure I know what that means :S

[hanakin]

I absolutely know what it means as I work as a photographer and designer, although my math was a little off it should be 936px.

basically the wrapper internal is divisible by 12 so 936/12 = 78.

assuming a 30px gutter. 78 - gutter = 48 (78 is also divisible by 3)

add to that the outer margins or bleed and you get 936+30 = 966

This gives us way more flexibility for a designer to work with.

so given this information all the breakpoints and container sizes should be as follows

gutter size: 30px

wide breakpoint: 1200px
wide container size + 30px bleed: 1182px
wide container size: 1152px
column size: 96px

large breakpoint: 990px
large container size + 30px bleed: 966px
large container size: 936
column size: 78px

medium breakpoint: 786px
medium container size + 30px bleed: 750px
medium container size: 720px
column size: 60px

small breakpoint: 480px
wide container size + 20px bleed: 100%
wide container size: 100%

[callumacrae]

Why are you talking about breakpoints? phpBB has a fluid design.

[nickvergessen]

@callumacrae I guess he menas the different levels of the responsive design

[Sumanai]

IMHO need a the width of at least 1200 pixels.
960 is not enough, it's only half Full HD.