…Is this a quiz? The last ALA design was fixed width too. My guess is that the *owners* are super-sensitive about pagination so a fixed width gives ultimate control.
>>Am I okay to post here as I see your comments are drawing from XFN?
ALA 4.0 actually started out as fluid, but was changed to fixed after the first or second round of designs revisions I did.
I honestly don’t think liquid layouts are the last step in evolution for web layouts. They are a fantastic option, and an even better solution as a stepping-stone to accommodate larger resolutions. The content columns still maintain comfortable line lengths for reading. ALA is supposed to be one of the grandaddy accessible sites, and it still is. But something many people are missing is that ALA is also one of the more trailblazing sites around. Remember To Hell With Bad Browsers?
Hmm… good point. Although I did notice the lack of clarity, I still thought it necessary to draw attention to it.
Off-topic: you should add a special blockquote style for comments. :)
Back on-topic: It’s possible that there might have been concern with ultra-high resolutions. At work I have a 23-inch Apple Cinema HD running 1900px wide… I really dislike liquid layouts when I happen to have the browser wider than even 3/4 that width.
It tends to make line lengths look a bit out of control.
At least, until we can get a commonality going on max and min-widths. You know?