Title: Fluid Width Last modified: August 19, 2016 --- # Fluid Width * [anindyaray](https://wordpress.org/support/users/anindyaray/) * (@anindyaray) * [15 years, 4 months ago](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/fluid-width/) * How have a fluid width in 2010 weaver ? and also how to have a widgetized home page in weaver ? Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total) * [wpweaver](https://wordpress.org/support/users/wpweaver/) * (@wpweaver) * [15 years, 3 months ago](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/fluid-width/#post-1846226) * Weaver is fixed width, although you can change what that width is. * The upcoming version of 2010 Weaver (1.6) will allow you to add specific posts via a shortcode to any static page. You will also be able to add an arbitrary top widget to any page. * [krystofo](https://wordpress.org/support/users/krystofo/) * (@krystofo) * [15 years, 3 months ago](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/fluid-width/#post-1846239) * Can someone recommend a template similar to Weaver that has fluid width? I like Weaver very much, but have not yet done much experimenting. If I cannot succeed in width adjustments to my standards, this is one thing that might make me switch to another template. * Now if you don’t mind a bit of my mind… * Back in 2005 when I learned HTML, many leading webdesigners adamantly recommended em sizing and other fluid width aspects. My own standard was to make sure my pages fit well on a 15″ monitor, and could remain presentable while being enlarged very significantly. If desired, I could still have a full-width header image, by making it a repeat background composed of an image joined with its mirror image. (The current default “field of wheat” image for Weaver would work perfectly for this.) * One of the worst and most common complaints to hear from a visitor was “sidescrolling.” I am not someone who keeps on top of technology issues, so I don’t know what has happened to change this attitude. Yet I see more and more people are using all kinds of small portable screens. Explorer has substantially improved its re-sizing capability (even without EM sizing). And yet, webdesigners have negated this capabililty. Web pages are getting wider, non-adjustable, and quickly force sidescrolling when the size is changed. * I understand that fixed-width makes it easier for a professional designer to look snappy for a corporate client. Sometimes this is needed for a complex page like MSN.com. However usually not, especially for a blog…! * I also understand that unlike table-based designs, CSS tends to fall apart. However the total abstinence of tables is a bugaboo. It is quite possible to use minimal tables that stabilize design and do not hinder SEO nor blind readers etc. * Even without tables, it is possible to obtain stability with fluid designs–using“ min-width” for Firefox and “[IE Expressions](http://www.webdesignforums.net/html_css_help_3/can_single_table_shell_no_tds_used_without_disadvantages_tables_21120.html#post171924)” for Explorer. (My research is several years old. Maybe there’s something better now.) I.e., you can certainly “fix” a blog design to the extent that it will not reduce further than 12″, but will look perfect at that width, and will also expand so it is not ridiculous in wide monitors. * Quite simply, when forums and blogs use fluid design, and a visitor’s eyes are tired, he or she can dial-up the text to super-jumbo without sidescrolling. Especially for “human-friendly text” format like a blog! I am seeing that capability less and less these days. I have a 22″ monitor but still can seldom make text as big as I feel like doing. And I am seeing more and more people harm their eyesight from being forced to work so much with computers. * One of the supposed benefits of computers over old-fashioned machinery, stone and paper is that it actually costs zero dollars for computers to adjust to every human need, instead of the other way around. Nonetheless, the trend seems to be, for example, the Walmart counter person has to hear a loud, inhuman “beep” with each checkout item, instead of a pleasant old-fashioned soft windchime “ ting.” Difference in cost in a computerized checkout system: $0.00. I suppose we are waiting for decades of computerized research to tell us what this does to the human nervous system. * “Blog” itself is a rather inhuman word. The name of “WordPress” is somewhat refreshing in our modern sea of techno-babble. On my “blogs” I will at least try to have a more human standard. But this is just my one opinion, of course. * [MTPrower](https://wordpress.org/support/users/mtprower/) * (@mtprower) * [14 years, 11 months ago](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/fluid-width/#post-1846290) * A-freakin’-men. * Gah, it’s way too difficult to find a WordPress framework that uses flexible width. There’s like what, two of them? And both have severe issues with child themes? Yeah… you would think that flexible-width would catch on, but no… You would think with the advent of 11-inch-screened netbooks, that people would start using flexible-width layouts, but no… * Somebody PLEASE build me a clean framework that resembles Suffusion or Arras, has zero back-end layout options (to make it small and fast), has 100% fluid width, and is child-theme friendly. I’ve been screwing around with themes for a few years and don’t even have a proper website set up yet because I can’t find something that does all of those. It’s ridiculous. Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total) The topic ‘Fluid Width’ is closed to new replies. ## Tags * [2010-weaver](https://wordpress.org/support/topic-tag/2010-weaver/) * 3 replies * 4 participants * Last reply from: [MTPrower](https://wordpress.org/support/users/mtprower/) * Last activity: [14 years, 11 months ago](https://wordpress.org/support/topic/fluid-width/#post-1846290) * Status: not resolved ## Topics ### Topics with no replies ### Non-support topics ### Resolved topics ### Unresolved topics ### All topics