Board Thread:Darwin/@comment-3974211-20140507025406/@comment-856287-20140507185719

There are two concerns here: 1) There should be a consistent minimum. 2) Designing for the minimum.

To point 1): Yes, I agree it should be consistent. That should be fixed.

To point 2): Designing with the minimum width "in mind?" Yes, I agree. Designing with absolute pixel values in order to hit the exact minimum width? No. Not if you can avoid it. Your designs should be such that the difference between 746px, 700px, and 677px is trivial. If 69 pixels break your design, your design is too brittle 😉. The minimum may shrink or expand in the future, and then all those absolute/non-elastic elements will have to be redone. It is far better to make the content expand and contract gracefully, ignorant of what the exact pixel values are. I was hoping to see exactly what you're (Emptylord) working on so I might help to come up with a responsive design.

I usually don't go over 670 pixels for elements like videos that have to have an absolute pixel width. If you use the button to insert a video, 670 is the biggest it allows, so that seems like a good standard for getting a reliable absolute value if you must have one.