[Design] [cosmo] [proposal] Detail View

[Matthew Eernisse]

Response below.

Mikeal Rogers wrote:
> It's also worth noting, and mde can expand upon this if he agrees, that 
> the possibilities for problems with different window sizes is much 
> higher in a design that follows chandler desktop exactly may be more of 
> a schedule risk than the perceived design work. Just a thought.
> 
> -Mikeal

Actually, I believe our stated goal is to give full, uncompromised 
support to anyone using 1024x768-sized screen resolution.

(And from what I understand lower than that is *qualified support,* 
which -- even though we haven't explicitly described that -- seems to 
mean something like (in Miracle Max voice, from the Princess Bride) 
"*mostly* works." That means that people with 800x600 resolution would 
have the buttons rendering off-screen, and we're hoping they will scroll 
down to see them.)

Now that I am actually going to check for myself -- it looks like the 
current, non-collapsible design does not actually fit in 1024x768 
resolution in a default Firefox install, because of the addition of the 
tabs. Looks like it still just barely fits in IE7. That stuff is already 
getting pretty compressed in there -- but I'm guessing our solution 
there would be to shave down the description field even more? Can one of 
the designers comment on this for me?

That was one of the reasons I even brought up the idea originally of 
doing something to accommodate the vertical space problem -- it's 
getting really tight, and that description field is already pretty cut 
down, forcing everyone to suffer for the sake of the lowest common 
denominator. The collapsible sections would allow us not to penalize 
people with bigger screens, but still let people on smaller ones see the 
all-important buttons. That was the original driver for the discussion.


Matthew