<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Updated WordPress, and left alignments suck</title>
	<atom:link href="http://aarmstrong.org/journal/2008/04/10/updated-wordpress-and-left-alignments-suck/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://aarmstrong.org/journal/2008/04/10/updated-wordpress-and-left-alignments-suck</link>
	<description>Website and journal of Andrew Armstrong</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:16:25 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Armstrong</title>
		<link>http://aarmstrong.org/journal/2008/04/10/updated-wordpress-and-left-alignments-suck#comment-80</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Armstrong</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:19:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aarmstrong.org/?p=131#comment-80</guid>
		<description>Yep, it's not even hard, and if I had a slightly higher resolution (being on 1680x1050 at the moment) I'd use it in windowed mode since there would be no benefit to full screen.

I know my site is 100% width, and I cater specifically to allow me to read my posts and items on my monitor so sort the images to suit :) not many sites do 100% width well, but some do quite well, usually forums and other places with lots of text.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep, it&#8217;s not even hard, and if I had a slightly higher resolution (being on 1680&#215;1050 at the moment) I&#8217;d use it in windowed mode since there would be no benefit to full screen.</p>
<p>I know my site is 100% width, and I cater specifically to allow me to read my posts and items on my monitor so sort the images to suit <img src='http://aarmstrong.org/journal/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> not many sites do 100% width well, but some do quite well, usually forums and other places with lots of text.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Mark</title>
		<link>http://aarmstrong.org/journal/2008/04/10/updated-wordpress-and-left-alignments-suck#comment-79</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 14:13:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aarmstrong.org/?p=131#comment-79</guid>
		<description>Yep. 

That computer you saw me sclepping around at GDC? 1920 x 1200 native on a 17" screen. And I have a 24" screen at home and the office to hook it up to. When you get a web site that is either:

1) Set for a width of about 1000 but pegged to the left, or
2) Set for 100% width regardless of window size

It really gets annoying.  I have simply just decided to actually use the "window" function in Windows and I always have my browser window at about 2/3 the width of the screen... maybe less.

The first thing I do when I set up a new web site is wrap the whole thing in a table that has a width of about 950 and center the bloody thing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yep. </p>
<p>That computer you saw me sclepping around at GDC? 1920 x 1200 native on a 17&#8243; screen. And I have a 24&#8243; screen at home and the office to hook it up to. When you get a web site that is either:</p>
<p>1) Set for a width of about 1000 but pegged to the left, or<br />
2) Set for 100% width regardless of window size</p>
<p>It really gets annoying.  I have simply just decided to actually use the &#8220;window&#8221; function in Windows and I always have my browser window at about 2/3 the width of the screen&#8230; maybe less.</p>
<p>The first thing I do when I set up a new web site is wrap the whole thing in a table that has a width of about 950 and center the bloody thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
