Welcome to the Treehouse Community

The Treehouse Community is a meeting place for developers, designers, and programmers of all backgrounds and skill levels to get support. Collaborate here on code errors or bugs that you need feedback on, or asking for an extra set of eyes on your latest project. Join thousands of Treehouse students and alumni in the community today. (Note: Only Treehouse students can comment or ask questions, but non-students are welcome to browse our conversations.)

Looking to learn something new?

Treehouse offers a seven day free trial for new students. Get access to thousands of hours of content and a supportive community. Start your free trial today.

CSS How to Make a Website CSS: Cascading Style Sheets Center the Wrapper

Max-Width

Why use 940px in Max-width? Why not 970px or 2000px? It seems arbitrary.

6 Answers

I think you might appreciate this article by ZURB on responsive design.

Typical it depends on your project and on the audience you are trying to target. For the most part it has to do with what the average consumers screen resolution is. 960px is the standard of the web. Take a look at this blog post explaining why it's so. In many cases you also have to look at several factors like if you are using a frame work. There are plenty of frameworks that already include a grid system to help you design and layout everything much faster and easier. And these frameworks have a max width pre-set

http://jdm-digital.com/2012/11/why-max-width-960/

That makes a lot of sense. Thank you. But why not make pages 100% fluid so we can than make all browser resolutions happy. Is that even possible, how would that be done?

I think because it's what Bootstrap used in an earlier version, and it also has to do with the golden ratio, math, etc. RWD has came a long way and screen resolutions are also getting larger.

Thank you so much. i guess what you are saying is that its alot harder to format a site to be completley fluid (tusing golden ration (which still are used within static positioning accroding to one of your articles) that it is more effective to aim for the lower resolution scrren so that at least everyone can see theentirety of your work rather than it being miss positioned or cut off an a smaller browser resoltuion.

Thank you so much. i guess what you are saying is that its alot harder to format a site to be completley fluid (tusing golden ration (which still are used within static positioning accroding to one of your articles) that it is more effective to aim for the lower resolution scrren so that at least everyone can see theentirety of your work rather than it being miss positioned or cut off an a smaller browser resoltuion. And thanks for bringing up bootstrap I've never used a framework before (Im not familiar with them) but this looks like the answer to my responsive issues (for most browsers that is).