KELVIN SMITH LIBRARY

We actually take pride in skinning our site to use a liquid width over on the EECS department page. The default template is pretty ridiculous. 800px provides neither form nor function, so I don't know why they insist on everyone using a static width.

I understand from my conversations with Kevin Adams that when that issue was raised the official response from the people with the power was to the effect of (paraphasing here)"It's 800px. That's the brand. The issue is now closed."

I think it has to do with making sure sites will work and are able to work on the least amount of technology possible. 800x600 seems to be the minimum resolution anyone should run their systems at. If you limit your horizontal limit to 800 pixels, it will look the same regardless if the user is running at 800x600 or 1920xwhatever. But it also limits what you can do within the space you are alotted. I don't claim to know what the real reason is but that's just a wild hunch.

Also, your Case branded blog is looking great! I decided to take a more simplistic approach on my page http://blog.case.edu/cry2 and stick more to the general template (which meant taking out the IMO ugly Movabletype calendar). I still need to work on my Monthly and Archive listing pages though.

I'm aware. Our response was something to the effect of "Bring it."

Keith,
It looks like you are indeed getting pretty close to the brand with your site, but keep in mind that you don't have to brand your personal blog. My thought is that a department blog should be branded for consistency, but that a personal blog can and should reflect the style of the blogger. (I admit to being remiss in the care, feeding and design of my own blog however!)

You are right that no "brand enforcement" policy has been put into place. We just try to work with departments one-on-one to assist them not only in implementation of the brand, but in site planning and marketing and communications goals, etc. Over time we'll learn whether this laissez-faire approach will continue. I think as long as departments continue making progress in this area, it shouldn't be a big issue.

Over the course of the past year we have been adding more information to the webtoolkit, and will continue to do so, both as we identify new concerns and as time allows. If you think we need to specify that the brand is 800 px, even though that width is built into the template, then perhaps we should. I've also recently acquired the master file for the Brand Identity Guidelines .pdf file, and we'll be updating that accordingly. This document was released before the web templates and as such focused primarily on print guidelines.

Kevin and I are also working on a web development blog. We've got a few kinks to work out with the comments area, but once those are set, this will be another place in which web maintainers can ask questions or comment on web related issues.

Regarding fixed width vs. liquid design, well that's a topic of debate amongst webmasters everywhere. I tend towards liquid for my own stuff, but I know many others prefer fixed width. Reasons for this include printability, line length (the eye follows a narrow width of type like a newspaper column more easily than a wide length), consistency, ease of use by maintainers of varying abilities, simpler math in a css-table hybrid environment, etc.

http://www.zeldman.com/ is fixed, http://www.meyerweb.com/ is liquid. They're both leaders in the field, so I'd say the jury is still out.

When Jeremy asked everyone for style ideas for http://blog.case.edu/directory/ I gave him a liquid design and it seems to work well for that content. In a non-templated world the liquid vs. fixed debate probably needs to be considered on a case by case basis reflecting the needs and style of a given site.

Thanks, Heidi!

I really am using my own blog as a development platform for the templating that will be used on departmental blogs. Toward that end I'm trying to think in very general terms.

I'm doing things like relocating the css definition for .masthead to the top of the file for easy access to the background url.

I'm also tweaking the other templates, the ones for things like individual archives and comments, to utilize the same look. The content, and location of that content varies slightly from one to another but in ways that should be both predictable and appropriate for the page.

Over all, this has been a good excercise for me in getting more comfortable with some of my less favorite parts of the branding rules. I recommend this for anybody who needs to work with a strongly defined design.

I'm handling the advanced cranberry templates, I'll leave it to others to tackle the other advanced color schemes and/or the normal templates.

Hey Keith,
I totally agree with you about this being a good working exercise. The more we play with these files--under a variety of circumstances--the more we understand both the limitations and the freedoms of the branded template style.

The more I work with these, the less restrictive they seem. I've found many ways to adapt them to my needs without breaking the rules. The main thing is to stay within the spirit of the brand. In the most general sense this means that there is a consistent look and navigational structure. Unique content, including masthead image is there, but for the user, the site offers a familiar interface .

Basically we want the soul of each site to shine through while also demarcating these sites as part of the overall Case site. Thus,
http://www.cwru.edu/farm/
http://www.case.edu/community/ and http://www.case.edu/development/ each both represent Case but are also clearly differentiated from one another. And in each case it is really the content, and the way it is organized that really supports both the Case vision and the goals of the individual site.

Regarding the fixed-width thing (again -- perhaps nobody cares by now), I don't see how catering to users with lower resolutions is an issue with liquid layouts -- if anything, fixed-width designs are more of a hassle for lower resolutions. By definition, liquid layouts will contract to fit any lower resolution, including those *below* 800px, assuming they are designed correctly.

If I were to make a fixed-width site, I would feel like it was cheating my readers out of their screen real-estate for the sake of my own laziness (it is certainly easier to control how a fixed-width site looks).

Branding is proceeding on all of the other templates within this blog. I will, eventually, make a complete list of the files available with links to code you can use to update your blog too. Meanwhile, I'm using this particular comment to test the branded comment preview screen.

WooHOO! It works as intended!