Fluid Engine

Audio Block

Double-click here to upload or link to a .mp3. Learn more

TL;DR.

This lecture provides a comprehensive guide to Squarespace's Fluid Engine, focusing on its features, best practices, and user experience optimisation strategies. It aims to educate users on how to effectively leverage the Fluid Engine for better website design.

Main Points.

• Purpose of Fluid Engine:

  • Fluid Engine enhances layout flexibility for users.

  • Increased responsibility for maintaining design consistency.

  • Importance of a disciplined approach to design.

• Best Practices:

  • Consistency in spacing is crucial for user experience.

  • Accessibility features must be integrated into layouts.

  • Performance optimisation is essential for media-heavy designs.

• Transitioning to Fluid Engine:

  • Understanding differences from the classic editor is key.

  • Upgrading sections requires careful consideration.

  • New sections automatically use Fluid Engine, streamlining the process.

Conclusion.

Embracing the Fluid Engine's capabilities can significantly enhance your website's design and functionality. By understanding its features and implementing best practices, you can create a visually appealing and user-friendly site that meets the needs of your audience.

Key takeaways.

• Fluid Engine offers enhanced layout flexibility for Squarespace users.

• Maintaining design consistency is essential to avoid user experience pitfalls.

• Accessibility should be a priority in all design decisions.

• Performance optimisation is crucial for media-heavy layouts.

• Transitioning to Fluid Engine requires careful planning and testing.

• Regular reviews of layouts can improve usability across devices.

• Engaging with the community can provide valuable insights and support.

• Utilising responsive design techniques enhances user experience.

• Documenting changes during upgrades can aid in troubleshooting.

• Continuous learning and adaptation are key to effective web design.

---

---

Play section audio

Understanding Fluid Engine.

Flexibility needs discipline.

Fluid Engine gives designers far more freedom to place, resize, and layer content, which changes the job from “filling a template” to “building a layout system”. That shift is powerful, but it also means consistency becomes a deliberate practice rather than an automatic outcome of the editor.

When a layout tool removes rigid structure, it does not remove structure as a requirement. It simply transfers responsibility to whoever is arranging the page. For founders, marketers, and web leads working in Squarespace, that responsibility includes visual consistency, reading flow, and ensuring that important information stays findable across devices.

In practical terms, flexibility introduces more decisions per page. Every decision might be small, a button width, a heading position, a margin, but repeated decisions quickly become a brand signal. If one page uses tight spacing and another uses wide gaps, the site starts to feel stitched together rather than designed. The outcome is not only aesthetic. Visitors often treat inconsistency as uncertainty, and uncertainty reduces trust.

Consistency is not “being identical”.

Consistency is predictable intent, not copied layouts.

Consistency does not require every page to look the same. It requires patterns that behave the same way. A site can have variety while still feeling coherent if typography, spacing logic, and interaction cues follow the same rules. The goal is for users to learn the interface once and then move faster everywhere else.

That is where a simple design rule-set outperforms “designing by feel”. A rule-set can be as lightweight as: one or two heading styles, one baseline spacing unit, a limited set of button sizes, and a small number of layout patterns for common content types such as services, product details, FAQs, and contact sections.

Consistency as a system.

Visual identity becomes fragile when the editor allows endless variation. The antidote is to define a system that survives day-to-day edits, new pages, and multiple contributors. This is not about creativity limits. It is about making creativity repeatable.

A practical starting point is to document “tokens” that stay stable: type scale, colour palette, spacing increments, and component rules. For example, teams often pick a single spacing increment (such as 8 or 10 pixels) and build every margin and padding as a multiple of that unit. The exact number matters less than the discipline of using one unit consistently.

Typography rules are just as important. If headings drift in size and weight between pages, content hierarchy becomes unclear. A user should not have to guess whether a line is a headline, a subheading, or a decorative statement. When hierarchy is reliable, scanning becomes easier, and users can quickly decide where to focus.

Practical rules that scale.

Define rules that reduce decisions.

• Fix a small set of layout patterns for common sections (hero, feature list, testimonial, pricing, FAQ, contact).

• Choose one baseline spacing unit and stick to it across pages.

• Limit heading variations and keep line lengths readable for long-form text.

• Standardise button sizes and placement so calls-to-action feel consistent.

• Create a “page QA” checklist that is run before publishing changes.

These rules sound simple, which is the point. A system that is too complex is rarely followed under deadline pressure. A system that is easy to remember is more likely to survive real business conditions such as rapid content changes, campaign launches, and team handovers.

Alignment and spacing risks.

User experience (UX) often degrades first through small layout issues rather than major design failures. A few misaligned elements, inconsistent padding, or uneven gaps between sections can make a site feel noisy and difficult to scan, even when the content itself is strong.

Misalignment also creates subtle navigation friction. If buttons move around between sections, or if text blocks start at different horizontal positions without a clear reason, users spend extra effort re-orientating. That effort is rarely conscious. It shows up as shorter sessions, fewer pages visited, and a higher chance of abandonment during key moments such as comparing offerings or trying to understand pricing.

Irregular spacing is particularly risky on responsive layouts. A page that looks fine on a large screen can become cramped or overly stretched on smaller viewports if spacing does not follow a consistent logic. The same content can read as premium and intentional on desktop, but messy and rushed on mobile, purely because spacing collapses unpredictably.

Strategies for reliable alignment.

Use a grid, then test breakpoints.

Most modern editors provide grid and snapping behaviours for a reason. A grid system acts as a constraint that preserves order while still allowing flexibility. Instead of eyeballing positions, the grid becomes the reference. That reduces “almost aligned” placements that look fine in isolation but drift over a full page.

Device testing should be treated as part of layout design, not a final check. The fastest workflow is to test early, adjust, and repeat in short cycles. If a team waits until the end, layout fixes tend to be rushed and local, creating new inconsistencies elsewhere.

For teams that prototype first, tools like Figma can help validate hierarchy and spacing before implementation. The value is not the mock-up itself. The value is making layout intent explicit so the live page is an execution of a plan rather than a series of improvisations.

Accessibility before flair.

Accessibility is easiest to protect when it is part of the design process from the start. When it is treated as an afterthought, it becomes a patching exercise that often conflicts with layout decisions already made.

Overlapping elements are a common example. Layering can create striking visuals, but it can also introduce reading order confusion, hidden content, and interaction conflicts. What looks “clean” to a designer can become ambiguous to someone using a keyboard, a screen reader, or high zoom. In a business context, that ambiguity becomes lost leads, incomplete purchases, or failed support journeys.

Accessibility is not only about disabilities. It also supports users in temporary or situational constraints: bright sunlight, a cracked phone screen, a slow connection, or a user trying to complete a task quickly while distracted. When content is clear and controls are distinguishable, more people succeed with less effort.

Operationalising accessibility checks.

Design for “perceivable and operable”.

Formal guidance such as WCAG frames accessibility around principles like perceivable and operable interfaces. Translating that into day-to-day practice usually comes down to predictable actions: keep contrast high enough, ensure links and buttons look interactive, maintain a logical reading order, and avoid layouts where important text sits on top of busy imagery.

• Keep interactive elements clearly separated so accidental taps are less likely on mobile.

• Write link text that describes the destination or action rather than using vague labels.

• Check focus states and keyboard navigation for menus and forms.

• Use descriptive image text where the image carries meaning, not just decoration.

When teams build accessibility into their workflow, it stops being a compliance burden and becomes a quality multiplier. Pages become clearer, interfaces become more intuitive, and content becomes easier to consume for everyone.

Reusable patterns beat chaos.

Reusable patterns reduce inconsistency more effectively than constant experimentation. Experimentation has value, but it should be contained to specific tests, not used as the default mode for every new section. Otherwise, a website becomes a collection of one-off layouts that are expensive to maintain.

Reusable patterns are not only visual. They are operational. When a business knows that a service page always includes a clear value statement, a short proof block, a process overview, and a call-to-action in consistent positions, content production speeds up. Teams write faster because they know the structure. Designers build faster because they know the components. Reviews become easier because the checklist stays stable.

This is also where plugins and modular enhancements can support a consistent system. Some teams use curated component libraries, including solutions such as Cx+, to keep interactive elements behaving predictably across pages. The benefit is less about novelty and more about reducing the number of bespoke fixes required to keep the experience coherent.

Building a pattern library.

Document what “good” looks like.

A design library can be lightweight and still effective. It can be a single internal page or document containing screenshots, notes, and rules: preferred layouts, spacing examples, button usage, heading hierarchy, and do-not-do warnings based on past mistakes.

For growing teams, the library becomes a training asset. New contributors can follow established patterns rather than learning through trial and error on live pages. That reduces the risk of a site gradually drifting away from its original structure as more people touch it over time.

Collaboration that scales.

Collaboration becomes smoother when layout decisions are treated as shared standards rather than personal preferences. Fluid layout tools can encourage individual creativity, but without shared constraints, a multi-author site often becomes inconsistent simply because different people solve the same problem in different ways.

Clear roles help. A content lead might own copy structure and clarity. A web lead might own layout patterns and interaction rules. An operations lead might own publishing workflows and approvals. When those responsibilities are explicit, the site becomes easier to manage, and feedback becomes more objective.

Collaboration also benefits from shared review rituals. A short weekly review of key pages, recent edits, and upcoming changes can prevent issues from stacking up. It is easier to correct drift after ten small edits than after a hundred.

Tooling that supports the workflow.

Make feedback visible and trackable.

• Use a task board to track layout and content changes through review stages.

• Collect page feedback in one place so patterns of issues become obvious.

• Store decisions in writing so standards are not lost between team members.

• Run a final “publish check” that covers alignment, readability, and interaction.

This approach reduces back-and-forth and prevents teams from repeatedly debating the same layout decisions. Over time, it builds a stable operational habit: create, review, refine, then publish with confidence.

Feedback and iteration loops.

User feedback is most valuable when it is structured and repeated. One-off opinions can be useful, but patterns in behaviour are where design improvements become obvious. Fluid layouts make iteration easier, but iteration still needs prioritisation or it becomes endless tweaking without measurable impact.

A useful approach is to define what “success” means for each page type. A landing page might be measured by enquiries or sign-ups. A services page might be measured by scroll depth and clicks to contact. A help page might be measured by reduced follow-up questions. When the metric is clear, layout changes can be assessed based on outcomes rather than taste.

Feedback loops can be simple: a short survey after a key action, a usability session with a small number of users, and regular review of behavioural data. The goal is not to chase perfection. The goal is to remove obvious friction and make the site more effective for real tasks.

Turning feedback into action.

Test, measure, then standardise.

A feedback loop works best when it has a repeatable rhythm: identify a problem, propose a change, test it, then fold successful changes back into the pattern library. If a new layout improves clarity, it should become a reusable pattern rather than a one-off exception.

When teams want stronger evidence, controlled experiments such as A/B testing can help compare two versions of a section or page. The key is to test one meaningful change at a time. Multiple changes at once make results hard to interpret, which leads to guesswork and inconsistent follow-through.

Even without formal tests, basic analytics can reveal where users struggle. High exits on a page, low engagement with a call-to-action, or repeated scrolling up and down can hint at unclear hierarchy or missing information. Those signals should guide layout refinement more than personal preference.

Keep skills current.

Design trends shift, but the underlying principles remain stable: clarity, hierarchy, consistency, and accessibility. Staying current is less about copying fashionable layouts and more about understanding why certain patterns become popular, then adopting what genuinely improves usability.

Technology changes also influence design decisions. New components, performance considerations, and evolving device behaviours can affect how layouts should be built. Teams that treat learning as part of operations tend to build more resilient sites because they adapt intentionally rather than reacting late.

Participating in a design community can help teams stay informed without becoming trend-chasers. The most useful learning often comes from case studies, teardown analyses, and shared problem-solving rather than highlight reels of visual inspiration.

From here, the next useful step is to connect layout discipline to content operations, because the strongest layouts still fail if pages are not maintained, updated, and governed as the business evolves.

---

---

Play section audio

Desktop and mobile layouts differ.

Desktop choices do not downscale.

Web layouts often look “finished” on a large screen, then feel strangely fragile on a phone. That mismatch usually comes from treating responsive design as a resize problem, rather than a behaviour problem. The same blocks may technically fit on mobile, yet the experience can become slower to scan, harder to tap, and easier to misunderstand.

Tools such as Fluid Engine make desktop layout experimentation feel limitless: drag, overlap, align, lock, and finesse. That freedom is useful, but it also creates layouts that rely on generous horizontal space, precise spacing, and desktop-style pointing accuracy. When the screen narrows, those assumptions break, and the “nice composition” becomes a stack of compromises.

A common failure pattern is the “desktop collage”: layered images, text pulled into negative space, and decorative elements placed for visual rhythm. On mobile, the same arrangement may collapse into awkward crops, text sitting over busy imagery, or elements competing for the first scroll. What was once deliberate hierarchy becomes visual noise, even when nothing is technically broken.

Overlaps are especially risky because they often depend on a particular width to keep the composition readable. In CSS terms, even simple overlaps are governed by stacking context rules that can behave differently once elements reflow. A small shift in container size or a different font rendering can flip which layer “wins”, creating surprises that are hard to notice until real-device testing.

Mobile also changes the physical interaction model. Desktop users can hover, precision-click, and keep multiple visual anchors in view. Phone users rely on thumb movement and short attention windows. That is why a sidebar, a two-column comparison, or a “nice-to-have” callout can work well on desktop but become friction on mobile, where a single narrow column is the default reality.

Context matters too. Desktop sessions often happen in stable environments: a seated posture, a predictable viewing distance, and fewer interruptions. Mobile sessions are frequently interrupted by notifications, movement, glare, and short bursts of attention. Designing a layout that assumes calm focus will tend to underperform in that “in and out” mobile pattern.

What actually breaks on mobile.

Desktop intent can survive, layout often cannot.

Many mobile issues are not “bugs”, they are predictable consequences of reduced width. A layout can lose meaning when a supporting visual moves above the headline, when captions drift away from their images, or when decorative elements push primary content down. The goal is not to replicate the desktop view, but to preserve the desktop intent: clarity, emphasis, and a logical journey.

• Content that relies on side-by-side scanning becomes a long scroll where comparisons are harder to hold in working memory.

• Typography that looks balanced at wide widths can become cramped once line lengths shorten and hyphenation changes.

• Visual rhythm can turn into repetition when multiple “feature blocks” stack without clear differentiation.

• Overlays and tightly positioned elements can cover controls or reduce readability when spacing collapses.

One practical way to think about desktop design is “composition first”. Mobile requires “sequence first”. Desktop can afford multiple focal points because the screen can carry them; mobile tends to reward a single focal point per scroll segment. When the design accepts that shift, the experience feels intentional rather than squeezed.

Mobile readability and tap comfort.

On mobile, the layout is only as good as the reading experience and the ease of interaction. A mobile user who needs to zoom, squint, or carefully aim taps is already doing extra work, and extra work becomes exit behaviour. Getting readability right means thinking about typography, spacing, and contrast as core functionality.

Start with the idea of a touch target. Links, buttons, and interactive icons need enough space around them to prevent mis-taps. It is not just the visible button, it is also the “tap area” created by padding and spacing. When layouts are adapted from desktop without revisiting spacing, interactions become fiddly, which quietly damages trust.

Typography choices also change under mobile constraints. A font that feels elegant on desktop may become dense on mobile if its letterforms are narrow or its x-height is low. Simple decisions like increasing line spacing, trimming paragraph length, and using clear subheadings can dramatically improve comprehension without changing the content itself.

Contrast is another silent driver of performance. On phones, lighting conditions vary constantly, so low contrast that looks stylish in a controlled environment can become unreadable outdoors. Ensuring strong colour contrast between text and background is less about visual preference and more about accessibility and endurance across contexts.

Mobile-friendly spacing is not only about aesthetics, it is about reducing cognitive load. When text is too tight, users read slower and retain less. When spacing is generous but structured, the page feels easier. That often means fewer words per paragraph, clearer separation between ideas, and avoiding dense blocks that look like “work”.

Practical mobile readability checks.

Readable first, pretty second.

• Check whether the first screen contains a clear headline, a short orientation statement, and the next obvious action.

• Ensure interactive elements are not tightly grouped, especially in navigation areas and product controls.

• Reduce visual clutter by limiting decorative elements that compete with primary content on small screens.

• Use short, informative headings so users can regain context after interruptions or fast scrolling.

If the design needs additional functionality to keep mobile interactions clean, that is where carefully chosen enhancements can help. On Squarespace sites, some teams use Cx+ plugins to standardise navigation patterns or improve content interactions without rebuilding templates. The key is to treat enhancements as guardrails for usability, not as extra decoration.

Content order shapes understanding.

On desktop, users can glance across sections, spot navigation, and jump around with minimal effort. On mobile, the experience is mostly vertical, and the order of content becomes the story. When content order is unclear, users feel lost even if every individual block looks fine.

A useful mental model is the inverted pyramid: place the most important message first, then expand into detail. That does not mean oversimplifying, it means respecting that mobile users often decide quickly whether a page is worth their time. If the top of the page is vague, the scroll becomes a gamble.

Logical order is also about continuity. When a page introduces an idea, then immediately diverts into a side topic, mobile users are more likely to forget the original thread. That is why clustering related content, keeping supporting visuals close to their text, and using consistent headings can improve comprehension without adding more words.

Visual hierarchy matters more on mobile because scanning is a survival strategy. Users skim headings to locate relevance, then dip into paragraphs. This is where visual hierarchy should be explicit: consistent heading sizes, clear section breaks, and lists where lists are appropriate. If everything looks the same, the page feels longer than it is.

Mobile layouts also benefit from progressive disclosure. Rather than presenting every detail at once, the page can guide users through layers of information: high-level message, supporting proof, then optional deep detail. This is especially useful for service pages, product pages, and documentation-style content where users have different levels of intent.

When pages are built in a flexible editor, content order can accidentally become “design order”: what looked visually balanced on desktop may not match the priority order that mobile users need. Rearranging blocks for mobile is not a compromise, it is often the correct interpretation of the same content for a different interaction model.

Sequencing techniques that work.

Sequence first, then refine layout.

1. Define the primary goal of the page and ensure it appears before secondary messages.

2. Group related content so that explanations and examples remain adjacent when stacked.

3. Use headings that communicate meaning, not just labels, so skim-reading still works.

4. Convert dense explanations into smaller paragraphs and lists to support scanning.

Images can help mobile comprehension when they clarify a concept quickly, but they can also inflate scroll length and distract from the message. The test is simple: if an image does not earn its space by adding clarity, it is likely adding friction. When visuals are essential, captions and placement should keep them attached to the idea they support.

Test, measure, then iterate.

Mobile quality is rarely achieved by “setting and forgetting”. Even careful builds can suffer from awkward wraps, hidden overlaps, and scroll fatigue once real content, real devices, and real users enter the picture. Testing needs to be treated as part of design, not as a final formality.

Start with device-level checks, not just browser resizing. Real phones handle fonts, zoom behaviour, and viewport quirks in ways that simulators can miss. The core variable is the viewport, and small differences in how it is calculated can change wrapping, spacing, and element alignment.

Next, watch for failure modes that are easy to overlook: headings that wrap into awkward shapes, buttons pushed too close to other controls, and sections that become unexpectedly tall. Excessive scroll length is not automatically bad, but it must be justified by sustained value. If a page feels long because it repeats patterns, users will bounce even when content is technically useful.

Measurement helps distinguish opinion from reality. Tools that report scroll depth, taps, and drop-off points can show where users stop engaging. A design team can then connect the behaviour to layout decisions: a confusing block order, a dense section, or a call-to-action that appears too late to matter.

Analytics should inform iteration, not provoke endless tinkering. The most useful approach is to set a hypothesis, make a small change, and observe whether behaviour improves. When teams tie changes to specific outcomes, the design evolves with discipline rather than guesswork.

Accessibility is not a separate project, it is part of mobile quality. Mobile users include people with low vision, motor constraints, and reliance on assistive technologies. Supporting screen reader compatibility, ensuring link text is meaningful, and keeping interaction targets usable benefits everyone, not only users who explicitly identify as needing accessibility support.

Some accessibility wins are straightforward: avoid relying on colour alone to communicate meaning, keep text readable without zoom, and ensure interactive controls are clearly labelled. Others require more attention, such as reducing motion that can cause discomfort, or ensuring that content remains understandable when read aloud by assistive tools.

Mobile QA checklist.

Catch friction before users do.

• Check the first two scroll lengths: they should establish purpose, credibility, and the next action quickly.

• Scan for overlaps and clipped elements, especially where images and text are positioned tightly.

• Tap through navigation and key actions with one hand to confirm comfort and accuracy.

• Review headings and paragraphs for awkward wraps that interrupt meaning mid-sentence.

• Use behavioural data to validate changes, then repeat the cycle with small, measurable iterations.

As mobile usage continues to dominate, teams that adopt disciplined mobile iteration usually outperform teams that treat mobile as a secondary layout. Once the mobile sequence is strong, desktop often becomes easier to refine because the content hierarchy is already proven. That shift sets up the next stage naturally: improving performance, reducing friction, and ensuring that the page delivers the intended outcome with as little effort as possible.

---

---

Play section audio

Responsiveness pitfalls to avoid.

Good websites behave like good tools: they adapt to the task, the context, and the constraints. On the web, that constraint is almost always the screen, because the same page may be opened on a 27-inch monitor, a small phone, a tablet held sideways, or a laptop running zoom at 125%. The goal of Responsive design is not visual perfection on every device; it is functional clarity, predictable interaction, and readable content without awkward workarounds.

When responsiveness fails, the damage rarely stays “visual”. Layout mistakes create hidden buttons, clipped text, accidental taps, broken navigation patterns, and measurable drops in engagement. For teams working in platforms like Squarespace, or for those embedding custom enhancements through coded add-ons (such as a curated plugin library like Cx+), the same principle still applies: the page must remain stable across screen sizes, not just look tidy in one editor preview.

Fixed layouts break on real devices.

The most common cause of layout failure is designing for a single screen width, then hoping everything scales down. In practice, rigid layouts behave like hard plastic: they hold shape until they crack. A site that looks “pixel perfect” in one environment can become frustrating in another because the browser is constantly negotiating space, font metrics, and touch behaviour.

Why rigid positioning causes trouble.

Design for flow, not coordinates.

Using Absolute positioning to place important elements is a frequent shortcut that later becomes expensive. When the viewport shrinks, the positioned element does not “understand” the new layout, so it can overlap text, cover a call to action, or fall outside the visible area. The user experience becomes a scavenger hunt, and the page often forces awkward workarounds like sideways panning.

A related issue appears when teams rely heavily on Fixed positioning for headers, sticky buttons, floating chat widgets, and persistent banners. On desktop, that may feel helpful. On mobile, it can reduce usable space, collide with browser UI, or block content that the visitor is actively trying to read. Some mobile browsers also handle fixed elements differently while scrolling, which can introduce jittery movement or unexpected layering problems.

Fluid layouts avoid many of these problems by using relative measurements rather than hard-coded numbers. This is where Relative units become practical rather than theoretical. Percentages, rem-based sizing, and flexible containers allow the page to adapt as the available width changes, without requiring a separate “mobile version” that drifts out of sync.

Even when a team chooses responsive methods, the edge cases still matter. A layout can look fine at popular breakpoints, yet fail at in-between widths, high zoom levels, or when the operating system uses larger accessibility fonts. A reliable approach treats testing as part of design, not a final polish step applied after the site is “finished”.

• Prefer flexible containers and proportion-based sizing over pixel-locked placement.

• Assume zoom, accessibility text settings, and unusual screen widths will occur in the wild.

• Audit sticky elements for overlaps with navigation, cookie notices, and banners.

• Test portrait and landscape orientation, not just a single mobile view.

Columns and small type reduce clarity.

Multi-column layouts can communicate structure on large screens, yet the same structure often collapses into clutter on small screens. The problem is not “columns are bad”; it is that too many simultaneous lanes of information compete for attention when the display is narrow, and readability becomes the first casualty.

Make content readable and tappable.

Mobile usability is a spacing problem.

When designers squeeze multiple columns into a phone layout, text becomes tiny, line lengths become awkward, and the page forces constant micro-scrolling. That friction compounds quickly, especially when the content is instructional or technical. A typical safeguard is to keep body text near 16 pixels or equivalent sizing, then adjust scale using rem units so the type remains readable across user settings.

Typography alone is not enough. Interactive elements fail when the tap area is too small or too close to other controls. A button can look “large enough” visually, yet still be hard to use if its clickable region is cramped. This is where Touch targets matter: spacing, padding, and separation reduce accidental taps and increase confidence, especially for checkout flows, form submissions, and navigation menus.

Readability also depends on rhythm. Tight blocks of text can feel heavy on mobile, even when the font size is acceptable. Adjusting Line height provides breathing room that helps scanning, while subtle improvements to letter spacing can make dense paragraphs easier to parse. The goal is not decorative typography; it is cognitive comfort, where the audience can follow the argument without fighting the layout.

Teams sometimes solve mobile layout pressure by hiding parts of the page, yet that often creates a new problem: important context disappears behind toggles, accordions, or tabs that visitors never open. A better approach is prioritisation, where less-critical content moves lower on the page, while the main message and primary actions remain immediately accessible.

• Collapse complex column structures into a single-column reading flow on small screens.

• Ensure body text remains comfortably readable under common device and accessibility settings.

• Increase padding and spacing around interactive elements to reduce mis-taps.

• Use typographic rhythm to support scanning, not to create decorative complexity.

Hierarchy beats hidden content tricks.

People rarely read websites in a straight line. They scan, jump, compare, and hunt for the piece of information that answers the question in their head. A page that respects this behaviour does not bury key details behind clever styling; it provides structure that makes the answer easier to find.

Structure content for navigation.

Make the page self-explanatory.

A strong content hierarchy begins with meaningful headings. Proper Heading structure does more than organise the page visually; it enables predictable scanning and helps assistive technologies interpret the page correctly. When headings are used as real structural anchors rather than decorative bold text, visitors can quickly understand what the page contains and where to go next.

This also affects Accessibility. Screen readers and other assistive tools rely on semantic structure to provide efficient navigation. If a page fakes headings with styled paragraphs, or nests sections without clear structure, users who rely on assistive technology lose the ability to skim and jump. That creates an invisible barrier that often goes unnoticed by the site owner until a customer complains or a compliance review occurs.

Large sites benefit from orientation aids, especially when content has multiple layers. A clean solution is Breadcrumb navigation, which shows where the visitor is and how they got there, without demanding extra thought. Breadcrumbs are not only for e-commerce. They help in documentation hubs, learning libraries, and service catalogues where users often enter via search rather than the homepage.

Hierarchy is also about emphasis. When everything looks equally important, nothing feels important. Bullet lists, short sections, and well-placed summaries reduce cognitive load. A team can highlight key actions, constraints, or prerequisites without turning the page into an aggressive sales pitch or a wall of noise. Clear structure supports trust because it signals that the content is designed to be used, not merely displayed.

• Use headings as semantic anchors, not as visual decoration.

• Keep critical information visible in the natural reading flow when possible.

• Use orientation cues for multi-layer sites, especially learning and support content.

• Design emphasis intentionally so important actions do not compete with minor details.

Decorative weight can kill speed.

Visual polish can support credibility, yet there is a point where decoration becomes drag. Heavy media, excessive animations, and stacked third-party embeds can turn a page into a slow-loading experience that visitors abandon before the message even lands. Performance is not only a technical metric; it is part of perceived professionalism.

Optimise media without losing quality.

Performance is part of design.

A slow site increases frustration and contributes to higher Bounce rate, especially on mobile data connections where latency is real and patience is limited. Teams often overestimate how “fast enough” feels because they test on office Wi-Fi, powerful devices, and warmed browser caches. Real visitors do not arrive with those advantages.

Practical performance work starts with images. Oversized images, uncompressed exports, and unnecessary formats create wasted bandwidth. Techniques like Lazy loading help by delaying off-screen media until it is needed, improving initial render time and letting visitors interact sooner. For content-heavy pages, lazy loading can also reduce the memory burden on mobile devices.

Script and stylesheet payloads matter as well. Combining and Minification of assets reduces download size and parsing overhead, which can be noticeable on lower-powered phones. It also reduces the chance that a small UI enhancement becomes the reason a page stutters or locks during scroll. When a platform already provides decent baseline performance, custom additions should protect that baseline rather than quietly erode it.

Visual design choices can support performance too. Using Vector graphics for icons and simple shapes often reduces file size compared to high-resolution bitmap exports. Animations can be used sparingly, and only when they add clarity, such as indicating state changes or guiding attention. When animation exists purely for decoration, it should be treated like any other cost: justified or removed.

• Test on real mobile networks, not only on fast office connections.

• Optimise images, then confirm they still look correct on high-density screens.

• Use lazy loading thoughtfully, especially for long pages and media-heavy sections.

• Keep scripts lean so added functionality does not create interaction lag.

Responsiveness improves when teams treat the layout as a living system rather than a static poster. Flexible sizing, readable typography, clear hierarchy, and disciplined performance choices work together to create pages that feel reliable. From here, the next step is to translate these principles into a repeatable build and review process, so every new section, template, or feature is evaluated against the same real-world constraints instead of personal preference.

---

---

Play section audio

Fluid Engine design best practices.

When teams build pages with Fluid Engine, the biggest gains rarely come from flashy effects or complex layouts. They come from repeatable decisions that make a site feel calm, predictable, and easy to scan. That is why practical design discipline matters: consistent spacing, reliable alignment, and patterns that reduce cognitive effort. Visitors may not consciously notice these choices, but they feel the difference in how quickly they can understand the page and move through it.

On Squarespace, the flexibility of drag-and-drop can be both an advantage and a trap. Without rules, small “just this once” adjustments start to accumulate until pages look like they were built by different people with different priorities. A strong workflow treats layout as a system, not a collection of one-off decisions. The goal is not perfection, but dependable structure that can scale as content grows, pages multiply, and different stakeholders contribute over time.

Maintain spacing discipline.

Spacing is the quiet infrastructure of a page. It shapes readability, establishes rhythm, and creates a sense of quality without a single extra word of copy. When spacing is consistent, users develop trust in the layout because the site behaves like a coherent product. When spacing is inconsistent, users spend attention on “figuring out the page” rather than absorbing the content.

A useful approach is to define a single “default” space that behaves like a unit of measure across the site. This does not mean every gap must be identical. It means there is a predictable relationship between small gaps, medium gaps, and large gaps. With that in place, sections feel connected, headings feel intentional, and dense content becomes less intimidating because whitespace is doing some of the organisation work.

Spacing discipline also reduces maintenance effort. When a new section is added or an existing section is edited, the layout remains stable because the rules already exist. That stability becomes especially important when multiple pages share similar structures, such as landing pages, service pages, and blog posts. A team can focus on message clarity and content accuracy, instead of repeatedly re-solving layout from scratch.

Practical spacing checks

• Pick a default gap size used between related elements, then only scale up or down in deliberate steps.

• Keep spacing around headings consistent so the hierarchy reads the same on every page.

• Audit pages at the end of each build cycle to catch “tiny tweaks” that break the system.

• Where content density increases, increase whitespace slightly rather than shrinking typography first.

Use a baseline grid.

A baseline grid is a simple way to keep spacing and alignment from drifting. It gives the layout a shared reference, so elements land in consistent increments rather than arbitrary positions. In practice, this can be as lightweight as agreeing that most vertical spacing will follow a small set of step sizes, and that key elements should align to predictable edges.

The reason this works is psychological as much as visual. Users process pages faster when patterns repeat and distances feel familiar. A baseline grid creates that familiarity by making the “tempo” of the page consistent. When headings, paragraphs, images, and buttons follow a shared rhythm, the page becomes easier to scan. That scanability is a real performance lever, because people decide whether to stay on a page within moments.

The grid also helps internal teams collaborate. When a site owner hands work from one person to another, a shared grid reduces interpretation errors. One person does not need to guess why a gap is 23 pixels in one place and 31 in another. The layout becomes legible, not just to users, but to the people maintaining it.

• Define a small set of spacing steps that cover most needs, from tight grouping to section-level separation.

• Reserve “custom” spacing only for exceptional situations, such as visually separating unrelated content clusters.

• When something looks off, check the gap first before changing element sizes or rewriting copy.

Standardise margins and padding.

Most spacing inconsistencies come from mixing margins and padding without a rule for when each is used. A straightforward convention helps: treat margins as the space between blocks, and treat padding as the internal breathing room inside a block. When that convention is followed, the page stops accumulating odd gaps that are hard to diagnose later.

A second convention is to standardise “outer spacing” at the section level. If every section has comparable top and bottom spacing, the entire site gains a stable rhythm. Sections feel like chapters in the same book rather than unrelated posters pinned to a wall. This becomes even more valuable when pages include a mix of text-heavy sections and media-heavy sections, because the consistent outer spacing keeps the page from feeling chaotic.

Teams can also reduce spacing drift by building a small library of reusable section layouts. If a hero section always uses the same internal padding rules, it remains consistent across campaigns. If a testimonial section always uses the same spacing between items, it remains legible regardless of how many testimonials are added. These are maintenance wins that compound over time.

• Use padding to protect content inside containers, especially when background colours or images are involved.

• Use margins to separate containers from neighbouring containers.

• Keep consistent section spacing even when section content varies significantly in length.

Adopt a spacing scale.

A spacing scale is a small set of predefined measurements used across the site. It prevents “random spacing” decisions and makes layout changes easier to apply consistently. Instead of choosing a new value each time something feels cramped, the team selects from a known set of options that are already proven to work together.

A practical scale often grows in predictable steps, such as doubling or using a steady progression. The exact numbers matter less than the discipline of only using the numbers in the scale. This creates a rhythm that users can subconsciously track. It also makes future changes simpler: if spacing needs to be increased slightly across the site, the team can shift up one step rather than editing dozens of individual gaps.

Spacing scales also reduce debates. Instead of arguing whether 18 or 20 is better, the conversation shifts to whether the layout needs “small”, “medium”, or “large” spacing. That is an easier decision to make and a faster one to repeat. Over time, this kind of constraint tends to improve outcomes because it reduces design noise and leaves more energy for content clarity and user journeys.

• Choose a scale that covers tight, normal, and spacious layouts without creating too many options.

• Use larger steps for section separation and smaller steps for grouped elements within a section.

• When a layout breaks on mobile, adjust by moving to a different step on the scale, not by introducing a new number.

Align columns and edges.

Consistency in alignment is one of the fastest ways to make a site feel professional. Misaligned edges create visual friction because the eye keeps noticing tiny discrepancies. Even when visitors cannot explain what is wrong, they often interpret the page as “messy” or “unfinished”. That perception matters because it can reduce trust, especially on pages that ask for conversions, sign-ups, or purchases.

Fluid layouts can increase the risk of misalignment because elements are easier to nudge into place without noticing that other sections now disagree. A reliable practice is to pick a small number of structural edges and keep returning to them. For example, a page might consistently align text blocks to the same left edge, keep images aligned to the same column width, and standardise the positioning of buttons. These repeated anchors make the layout feel stable.

Alignment is also tied to readability. When line lengths vary unpredictably and columns shift without reason, scanning becomes slower. When column widths are consistent, headings read cleanly, lists feel structured, and the page becomes easier to navigate without heavy visual decoration. This is a design approach that improves clarity without adding complexity.

• Pick a primary text column width and keep it consistent across most sections.

• Where a secondary column exists, align it to the same edges each time rather than “eyeballing” placements.

• Re-check alignment after content edits, because small copy changes can shift spacing and column balance.

Repeat layout patterns.

Repeating patterns is not about making every page identical. It is about creating a reliable experience where users can predict how content will behave. A layout template for key page types helps users navigate without re-learning the interface. Blog posts can share the same content structure, service pages can share the same flow, and product pages can share the same hierarchy of information.

Pattern repetition also supports operational efficiency. When the team needs to publish frequently, reuse reduces build time and reduces the chance of accidental inconsistencies. The same applies to updates. If the organisation changes a call-to-action style or introduces a new trust element, pattern-based pages can be updated more systematically than pages that were built as unique one-offs.

Patterns should still allow for intentional variation. A campaign page might need a distinct hero section, or a long-form guide might need extra navigation aids. The principle is that variation is introduced on purpose, not as a side effect of ad hoc editing. When variation is controlled, the site stays coherent while still feeling fresh.

• Create a small set of page structures that cover most business needs: landing, service, about, article, and contact.

• Use the same hierarchy rules inside each structure, such as consistent heading spacing and predictable section order.

• Allow variation only where it supports a different user intent, such as exploration versus conversion.

Design for responsiveness.

Modern sites live across screens, which means responsive design is not optional. Fluid Engine makes it possible to build layouts that adapt across device types, but that flexibility must be treated as a testable requirement, not an assumption. A layout that looks excellent on desktop can become cramped, confusing, or slow to scan on mobile if the spacing system and alignment rules are not built with smaller screens in mind.

A practical approach is to design mobile-first decisions into the layout rules. For example, if a section uses two columns on desktop, it should have a predictable stacking behaviour on mobile. If a call-to-action sits beside supporting copy on desktop, it should remain visible and clear on mobile without forcing users to hunt for it. This is not about shrinking everything down. It is about restructuring hierarchy so the essential information remains prominent regardless of screen width.

Responsiveness is also a performance issue. On mobile, long pages with heavy media can feel slower, and users are more sensitive to friction. Clean spacing, predictable patterns, and restrained visual complexity reduce that friction. The result is not just a better-looking page, but a page that behaves well under real-world conditions such as limited bandwidth, touch navigation, and short attention windows.

• Check mobile layouts early, not at the end, so structural issues are easier to fix.

• Reduce multi-column complexity on mobile by stacking content in a consistent order.

• Ensure tap targets and interactive elements have sufficient spacing for touch accuracy.

Build for accessibility.

Accessibility is about making sure all users can navigate and understand content, including users with disabilities. The WCAG guidelines provide a clear reference for inclusive design, but the practical point is simpler: a site should not require perfect vision, perfect motor control, or perfect technology to be usable. When accessibility is prioritised, sites tend to become clearer for everyone.

Spacing and hierarchy play a direct role in accessibility. Clear separation between sections helps screen magnification users track content. Predictable patterns reduce confusion for users with cognitive differences. Strong contrast and readable typography improve comprehension under bright sunlight or poor screens, not just for users with diagnosed impairments. Accessibility is not a niche add-on; it is a quality baseline.

Teams can make accessibility less abstract by treating it as a checklist during iteration. Image descriptions, heading structure, link clarity, and focus states can be verified as part of regular quality control. Some issues are quick fixes and some require rethinking layout decisions, but both are easier when caught early. The important part is consistent evaluation, not perfection on day one.

• Ensure headings follow a logical structure so assistive technologies can interpret the page correctly.

• Use meaningful link text rather than vague labels so navigation remains clear out of context.

• Test contrast and readability in realistic conditions, including mobile screens and bright environments.

Strengthen visual hierarchy.

A strong visual hierarchy guides attention. It tells users what matters first, what supports it, and what to do next. Without hierarchy, pages become flat and users must do the sorting work themselves. With hierarchy, the page behaves like a well-edited document where the structure is obvious before the first sentence is fully read.

Hierarchy is created through size, spacing, contrast, and position. Larger headings signal importance. Whitespace isolates key concepts. Buttons and links stand out because they are visually distinct and positioned where the eye naturally lands. The best hierarchy is usually the simplest: a small number of clear levels that repeat consistently, rather than many competing styles that fight for attention.

Hierarchy also supports scanning. Most visitors do not read every word. They scan headings, skim lists, and then decide where to invest attention. That behaviour is normal, especially on mobile. When hierarchy is designed well, scanning still leads to correct understanding because the page structure carries meaning. When hierarchy is weak, scanning produces confusion and users either bounce or miss key information.

• Keep heading styles consistent so hierarchy is recognisable across pages.

• Use lists where they genuinely improve scanning, not as decoration.

• Place key actions near the content that motivates them, rather than burying them at the end.

Test and iterate continuously.

A site is never “finished”. It is a living system that changes as the business evolves, content expands, and user expectations shift. iteration is how teams keep a site aligned with real behaviour rather than internal assumptions. Fluid Engine supports rapid edits, which can be an advantage if it is paired with disciplined review cycles.

Testing does not need to be complex to be valuable. Simple feedback loops can reveal structural issues, such as users missing key navigation, misunderstanding page sections, or failing to notice calls to action. Where data is available, behavioural signals can be more reliable than opinions. A small set of metrics and observations, reviewed regularly, can highlight which pages need refinement and which design decisions are working as intended.

For teams ready to go deeper, A/B testing can compare variations of layouts or calls to action, and tools such as heat maps can reveal where users click, pause, or abandon a page. These methods are most effective when the baseline layout system is already consistent, because the team can isolate what changed and why it mattered. Testing random layouts produces random results.

Iteration is also where modular enhancements can support the workflow. For example, if a site uses a growing library of UI improvements delivered via Cx+, consistent layout patterns make those enhancements easier to deploy and evaluate. The point is not to add tools for their own sake, but to reduce friction in publishing, updating, and measuring improvements across multiple pages.

• Run periodic layout audits to catch drift in spacing, alignment, and hierarchy.

• Use analytics to identify high-traffic pages first, because improvements there compound faster.

• Change one major variable at a time so results can be interpreted clearly.

• Document rules as the site evolves so new contributors can maintain consistency.

Once these foundations are in place, the next stage is about refinement: deciding which patterns deserve to be formalised into templates, where content structure should be simplified, and how evidence from testing should shape future page builds. That progression keeps Fluid Engine work grounded in outcomes, not aesthetics alone, while still supporting a clean and intentional visual identity.

---

---

Play section audio

Accessible structure inside layouts.

Meaningful headings in complex layouts.

In modern web pages, layout complexity often grows faster than content clarity. A page can look tidy to someone scanning visually, yet still be difficult to navigate if its structure is not expressed properly in web accessibility terms. Headings are one of the simplest ways to make content understandable at speed, because they communicate what each section is, why it exists, and how it relates to the rest of the page.

Meaningful headings do two jobs at once. They help visitors skim, and they help assistive technology users jump directly to the section they need. A person using a screen reader often navigates by headings first, because it is the quickest way to build a mental map of a page. If headings are vague, missing, or used as decoration, the user is forced into slow, linear reading, which creates unnecessary friction even when the content itself is strong.

Headings also influence discovery. Search engines use headings to interpret content importance and relationships, which affects how pages are indexed and displayed. When heading text clearly reflects the section that follows, and when the page has a consistent hierarchy, it supports Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) without turning headings into keyword dumping. The goal is descriptive structure, not artificial ranking tricks.

• Use headings to describe the content that follows, not the visual style that is wanted.

• Keep heading text specific enough that it still makes sense out of context in a headings list.

• Maintain a consistent hierarchy so visitors can predict what will come next.

• Break long sections into smaller chunks using sub-headings that reflect genuine topic changes.

• Review headings whenever content changes, so structure stays aligned to reality.

Technical depth: heading hierarchy audits.

Headings are a map, not a font choice.

A reliable heading system is rooted in semantic HTML. It should reflect how the content is organised, not how the layout looks. A practical approach is to treat headings as an outline. If the outline reads like a coherent table of contents, the hierarchy is likely doing its job. If it reads like random labels, repeated phrases, or decorative titles, the structure is usually working against the user.

In complex layouts, the most common failure pattern is skipping levels, or using the same heading level everywhere. Skipping is not always catastrophic, but it often signals that headings are being applied based on size rather than meaning. A better method is to decide the page’s top-level sections first, then nest only when the content genuinely belongs under a parent topic. This keeps navigation predictable for assistive tech users and reduces confusion when content is repurposed into other contexts, such as search results, previews, and automated summaries.

For teams working in platforms with templated blocks, it helps to define a simple rule set. For example: one main page title is treated as the top heading, major page sections use the next level down, and content within those sections nests further only when needed. In Squarespace, that typically means being deliberate about what text is configured as a heading versus styled as bold text. Where templates already generate a top-level title, the safest move is to align custom section headings beneath it rather than competing with it.

Reading order must match visuals.

Visual design often relies on grids, columns, and responsive reflow. That flexibility is useful, but it introduces a risk: the order that looks correct on screen can diverge from the order that is read, tabbed, and announced by assistive technologies. The foundation is the Document Object Model (DOM) order, which is the sequence content exists in the page source.

When the reading order matches the visual order, navigation feels natural. Headings lead into paragraphs, related content stays together, and interactive elements appear where people expect them. When the order is mismatched, a visitor might see “Step 1, Step 2, Step 3” in a tidy row, while assistive tech reads “Step 2, unrelated sidebar, Step 1, footer link, Step 3”. Even users without assistive tech can feel the damage when keyboard focus jumps unpredictably across the page.

Layout tools can make this problem subtle. A grid system might reposition elements to create a balanced design, but the underlying order remains unchanged. The result is a page that looks clean, but behaves inconsistently. This is why reading order should be validated as a behaviour, not assumed from appearance.

• Check that the source order matches how the content is intended to be consumed.

• Be careful when reordering elements purely for design symmetry.

• Prefer layout strategies that do not require order manipulation to “look right”.

• Validate keyboard focus flow on desktop and mobile widths, not just one breakpoint.

Technical depth: layout reordering risks.

Responsive design must not create logical chaos.

Modern layout methods like CSS Grid and flexbox can visually rearrange content without changing source order. That can be appropriate for purely decorative elements, but it becomes dangerous when it is applied to meaningful content, form controls, or navigation. A practical rule is: if something contains language or functionality, it should stay in a logical sequence in the source unless there is a strong reason and a tested mitigation.

Assistive technologies use multiple cues to interpret order, and developers sometimes reach for extra attributes to force a correction. This is where Accessible Rich Internet Applications (ARIA) is often misunderstood. ARIA can label, describe, and clarify intent, but it cannot reliably fix a broken structure. It should enhance semantics, not replace them. If the DOM order is wrong, the best fix is usually to reorder the markup so it matches the intended reading flow, then let styling do its job without fighting the structure.

Keyboard behaviour is an especially sensitive indicator. If focus order feels “teleporting”, the cause is often hidden structural complexity: off-canvas elements, visually reordered content, or interactive widgets that were built without considering how a keyboard user would traverse them. Overusing tabindex to force a custom order can make things worse over time, because it creates a maintenance trap. Each new link or button can break the handcrafted sequence, turning a small fix into a permanent source of regressions.

Legibility through size and contrast.

Accessibility is not only about structure and navigation. If users cannot comfortably read the content, the page fails at its core purpose. Legibility depends on several factors, but the most common issues are tiny text and weak contrast. A strong baseline is to respect minimum comfortable sizes and to meet a reliable contrast ratio between text and background.

Text that looks stylish at a glance can become exhausting when read for more than a few seconds, especially on mobile devices or in bright environments. Small body text forces constant zooming or squinting, and low contrast turns reading into guesswork. These problems hit users with visual impairments hardest, but they also reduce comprehension and retention for everyone, including people reading quickly during work or while commuting.

Typography choices matter. Some fonts are technically readable but practically tiring, particularly when combined with tight line spacing or narrow letterforms. Clean, well-spaced text blocks support scanning, reduce bounce, and make long-form content feel lighter. It is often better to reduce visual clutter through spacing and hierarchy than to compress everything into smaller type.

• Keep body text comfortably sized across breakpoints, not just on desktop.

• Use sufficient spacing between lines and paragraphs to prevent dense blocks.

• Test contrast with real devices, including lower quality screens.

• Use consistent emphasis so bold and italic highlight meaning, not decoration.

Technical depth: measuring visual clarity.

Design choices should be testable, not subjective.

Legibility is easier to maintain when teams adopt measurable standards. A common reference point is WCAG guidance, which includes contrast targets and practical recommendations for readable text presentation. Even when a brand has strict visual rules, it is usually possible to meet these standards by adjusting shade selection, increasing font size slightly, or changing background treatments behind text.

Font selection is another lever. Many interfaces benefit from a sans-serif typeface for body content, because screen rendering tends to be cleaner at smaller sizes. That does not mean serif fonts are unusable, but it does mean they require more careful tuning of size, spacing, and weight. The key is not the category of font, it is whether the final rendered result supports fast, low-effort reading.

Theme variants can introduce edge cases. For example, dark backgrounds might look premium but can create low contrast when paired with muted colours. A properly implemented dark mode is not simply “invert colours”. It needs intentional contrast checks, hover and focus visibility, and readable link styling. Without those checks, a dark theme can become less accessible than the original design.

Keyboard usability for every element.

Keyboard access is a non-negotiable foundation for inclusive interaction. Many users cannot use a mouse consistently, and some avoid it due to pain, device limitations, or workflow preference. A site that supports keyboard navigation well tends to be more robust overall, because it forces clarity in interactive states, predictable flow, and proper semantics.

The practical expectation is simple: every interactive element that can be clicked should be reachable, usable, and understandable from the keyboard alone. That includes links, buttons, menus, forms, accordions, and modal dialogs. If a user can tab to something but cannot activate it, the site creates false affordances. If they can activate it but cannot exit it, the site becomes a trap.

Visibility matters as much as function. Users need to see where they are on the page. A strong focus indicator is not a decorative detail, it is the keyboard equivalent of a cursor. Removing focus outlines because they “look ugly” is one of the fastest ways to break accessibility, and it often creates support issues that are hard to diagnose because mouse users never see the problem.

• Ensure tab order follows the page’s logical flow and matches visual placement.

• Keep focus styles visible across backgrounds, including images and gradients.

• Confirm that interactive components can be opened and closed with the keyboard.

• Validate that forms can be completed without a mouse, including error handling.

Technical depth: avoiding keyboard traps.

Interaction must include entry and exit.

A common failure in interactive layouts is the keyboard trap. This occurs when focus enters a component, such as a modal, menu, or embedded widget, and the user cannot escape because focus is not managed correctly. The fix is rarely complicated, but it must be implemented intentionally: focus should move into the component when it opens, remain within it while it is active when appropriate, and return to a sensible location when it closes.

Navigation shortcuts also help. A well-placed skip link allows keyboard users to bypass repeated content, such as large menus or banners, and jump straight to the main page content. This is particularly valuable on content-heavy pages where the header is consistent across the site. It is a small addition that reduces friction on every visit.

Forms need special attention because they are often a conversion point. Clear labels, predictable validation messages, and logical progression through inputs can be the difference between completion and abandonment. “Placeholder-only” labelling is risky because placeholder text disappears, which can confuse users mid-entry and can be read inconsistently by assistive technology. Proper labelling and clear error feedback reduce support requests and improve completion rates for everyone.

Accessibility is an ongoing system.

Accessibility work is most effective when it is treated as a system rather than a one-off project. Many teams fix obvious issues during a redesign, then slowly regress as new content is added, layouts evolve, and plugins or third-party embeds introduce fresh complexity. This is how accessibility debt builds: each small compromise seems harmless, but the combined effect eventually creates a site that feels brittle and frustrating.

Long-term stability comes from routines. Regular reviews of headings, reading order, contrast, and keyboard behaviour create a baseline that can be maintained even as the site grows. This does not require perfectionism, it requires consistency. When a team knows what “good” looks like, they can catch problems early rather than discovering them after users complain.

Testing should combine automated and manual methods. Automation catches common issues quickly, but it cannot judge context, clarity, or whether a heading truly matches the content that follows. Manual testing reveals the real experience, including edge cases caused by responsive breakpoints, dynamic content, and unusual user flows.

Technical depth: practical testing stack.

Blend fast automation with human reality.

Automated tools are useful for fast signal. Tools like Lighthouse and browser-based scanners can flag missing labels, low contrast, and structural errors. They are good at finding repeated patterns across pages, which is especially useful when a template issue affects the whole site. The limitation is that they often miss whether content actually makes sense when navigated non-visually.

Manual testing should include at least one screen reader workflow. For Windows users that often includes NVDA, while enterprise contexts may include JAWS. On Apple devices, VoiceOver is a common baseline. The goal is not to become a full-time assistive tech expert, it is to verify that headings, landmarks, links, and interactive components behave logically under real navigation patterns.

Finally, user insight is irreplaceable. Structured feedback from people who rely on assistive technologies often exposes problems teams never anticipate, such as confusing button labels, unclear focus changes, or content sections that are technically “valid” but practically hard to interpret. When teams build regular review points into their workflow, accessibility becomes a maintained quality attribute rather than a periodic rescue operation.

Workflow checks that scale.

For accessibility to stay consistent, it needs to fit inside everyday work. The easiest approach is to define a lightweight definition of done for content and layout changes. If a new section is added, headings should be reviewed. If a component is introduced, keyboard behaviour should be tested. If colours are changed, contrast should be re-checked. This keeps standards enforced without turning every update into a formal audit.

Content teams can support this without deep technical knowledge by adopting structured writing habits: headings that match section intent, link text that describes destination, and lists that represent genuine grouping rather than visual indentation. Development teams can support it by avoiding patterns that break semantics, such as clickable divs, hidden focus states, and layout tricks that reorder meaning.

In builder platforms, repeatable components are the biggest leverage point. If a template section is accessible, every page using it improves by default. If it is broken, the problem spreads everywhere. This is one reason teams often adopt curated component approaches, sometimes supported by internal tooling or controlled plugins. For Squarespace-specific ecosystems, selectively using well-scoped enhancements, such as a quality accordion implementation, can reduce the temptation to hack structure for visual results. If a team already uses a library like Cx+, the responsible move is to ensure any injected UI patterns preserve headings, focus behaviour, and readable structure rather than prioritising animation alone.

• Run a quick keyboard pass after any layout change, especially around navigation and forms.

• Scan headings as an outline to verify structure still matches the content.

• Check reading order at multiple breakpoints, not just the default desktop view.

• Validate contrast on real devices, including in bright light and dim environments.

• Schedule periodic manual testing to catch issues automation will not understand.

When structure, order, legibility, and keyboard interaction are treated as default quality checks, accessibility stops being a separate discipline and becomes part of how a site stays usable as it evolves. That foundation makes it easier to introduce more advanced patterns later, such as richer navigation systems, dynamic content loading, and interactive help experiences, without sacrificing clarity or control.

---

---

Play section audio

Performance considerations for fast sites.

Optimise media for faster rendering.

Performance often fails for simple reasons: pages ship too many bytes, too early, to devices that cannot hide the cost. A fast site is not only about “speed”; it is about reducing friction so content becomes usable quickly and stays stable while loading. When teams treat media as a performance budget line item, load time stops being a mystery and becomes an engineering decision.

Media should be sized, compressed, and scheduled, not dumped.

Choose efficient formats and dimensions.

Large images are a frequent culprit because they inflate download size and force extra decoding work on the device. A practical baseline is to export photographs to WebP (or a comparable modern format when available), keep dimensions close to the maximum displayed size, and compress until quality loss becomes noticeable. The intent is not “make everything blurry”; it is to avoid shipping a 4000px asset to display at 900px.

Images that look fine on desktop can still overwhelm mobile CPUs during decode, particularly when multiple images enter view at once. That is why teams benefit from thinking in “screenfuls”: what appears above the fold should be light, and what appears later should arrive later. Pages that feel instant usually do less work upfront, even if they eventually load the same total content.

Serve the right image to the right device.

Responsive delivery prevents over-downloading by allowing the browser to pick an appropriate file based on viewport and pixel density. When images are authored in HTML, this is typically implemented with the srcset attribute and sensible size descriptors. When images are managed by a CMS, the goal stays the same: ensure that mobile does not receive desktop-weight images, and high-density screens receive crisp assets without forcing everyone else to pay for that fidelity.

It is worth noting that responsive image strategy is not only about performance; it is also about perceived quality. If a site serves one low-resolution image to every device, high-density screens can look soft. If a site serves one high-resolution image to every device, mobile pays a heavy cost. Responsive delivery reconciles the trade-off by allowing each device to download an asset that matches its needs.

Delay non-critical media loading.

Lazy loading is a straightforward optimisation that improves initial render by deferring images that are not yet visible. It is particularly helpful on content-heavy pages such as blogs, galleries, and long-form guides, where users will not see most images immediately. The initial page becomes interactive sooner because the browser is not competing to download everything at once.

Lazy loading works best when paired with clear layout sizing. If images do not reserve space, the page can shift as media loads, creating a visibly unstable experience. Stable layout is part of performance, not a separate aesthetic preference. A page that loads quickly but jumps around still feels slow because users cannot trust the interface while it settles.

Avoid autoplay media unless justified.

Autoplay video and audio can consume bandwidth, trigger heavier decoding pipelines, and compete with the main content for device resources. It can also create unwanted distraction, especially when the user’s goal is to read or compare information. A more performance-aligned approach is to provide a clear play action, load media on intent, and reserve autoplay for contexts where it is genuinely necessary to communicate meaning.

When media is essential, the priority should be to keep the first meaningful content clear and quick. If a hero section depends on video, teams can still control cost by using lightweight posters, compressing video aggressively, and ensuring the media pipeline does not block text rendering. The goal is not to remove richness; it is to prevent richness from becoming a tax on every visitor.

Control third-party weight and risk.

Third-party features often arrive as “just embed this snippet”, but each embed is a performance and reliability decision. External scripts introduce extra network requests, extra CPU work, and extra points of failure. A fast site treats third-party inclusions as a curated set, not an accumulating pile.

Every embed should earn its place on the page.

Audit necessity before adding anything.

Third-party embeds can be valuable, but they should be evaluated against measurable outcomes. If an embed exists for “nice to have” reasons, it is a candidate for removal or replacement. Many teams discover they have features installed that nobody uses, yet everyone pays for via slower loads and more brittle pages.

A simple test is to ask: what problem does this embed solve, and what would happen if it was removed for a week? If the answer is “nothing meaningful”, that embed is probably costing more than it returns. This thinking is especially important on mobile, where the margin for unnecessary work is small.

Prefer native platform features where possible.

Platforms such as Squarespace often provide built-in options that cover common needs like basic forms, galleries, maps, and commerce components. Native features are typically better integrated, more consistent with the theme, and less likely to introduce performance surprises. When a native feature can achieve the goal, it is usually the safer baseline.

Native does not automatically mean “fast”, but it often reduces unknowns. It also simplifies support, because issues can be traced to a smaller set of moving parts. For teams managing multiple sites, consistency matters: fewer bespoke embed patterns means fewer edge cases to debug when a browser update changes behaviour.

Consolidate and schedule external scripts.

When external services are truly required, consolidation reduces overhead. A common pattern is multiple small embeds that each load their own frameworks and trackers. Consolidation can mean selecting one provider that covers multiple needs, or reducing the number of page locations where a script is loaded. The goal is to avoid duplicating heavy libraries across multiple widgets that do similar things.

This is also where governance matters. Teams can establish rules such as: only load analytics once, only load chat widgets on key pages, and only load conversion tracking after consent where required. A fast site is usually a governed site, not a site with better luck.

Keep output safe when generating content.

External widgets can inject complex markup that is difficult to control. When an organisation uses AI features or dynamic content helpers, sanitised output becomes critical. Tools such as CORE (when used in a support or search context) are often strongest when output is restricted to a safe tag whitelist, because it limits the risk of unexpected script injection and keeps content predictable. That predictability supports both security and performance, because fewer exotic elements means fewer rendering surprises.

Even when AI is not involved, the principle stands: control what gets inserted into the DOM, keep markup simple, and avoid importing entire application frameworks just to render one small feature. Performance improves when the page stays in control of its own structure.

Use animations without jank.

Animation can make a site feel alive, but it can also expose performance weaknesses fast. “Jank” usually appears when animations trigger expensive layout recalculations, heavy repaints, or JavaScript-driven loops that steal time from user interaction. The aim is not to avoid animation, but to ensure motion enhances comprehension rather than stressing the device.

Motion should guide attention, not consume resources.

Prefer CSS-driven motion for common effects.

When possible, CSS animations and transitions are often smoother than scripting because the browser can optimise them more effectively. Many motion effects such as fades, transforms, and simple transitions can run with minimal overhead when implemented cleanly. This reduces the need for continuous JavaScript execution, which is particularly important on mobile devices with constrained CPU budgets.

The practical approach is to reserve JavaScript animation for cases where it is genuinely required, such as advanced physics interactions or dynamic timelines. Even then, the goal should be to keep scripting lightweight, avoid per-frame recalculation where possible, and prefer browser-friendly properties.

Design for hardware realities.

Many smooth animations rely on the device’s GPU to handle transforms efficiently. When animation triggers layout changes or heavy paint work, the browser cannot offload enough to hardware acceleration, and frame rate drops. That is why certain choices matter: subtle transforms tend to behave better than layout-shifting animations that move large blocks of content around the page.

Mobile devices vary widely in capability, and the same animation can feel fine on a high-end phone while stuttering on older hardware. A performance-minded design approach treats the lower-end device as a first-class citizen. If motion breaks the experience on common mid-tier hardware, the motion is not “premium”; it is a liability.

Limit duration, frequency, and concurrency.

Short, purposeful animations are usually more effective than long sequences. When animation runs constantly, it competes with scrolling, tapping, and reading. The most performance-friendly patterns are interaction-based: animate on intent, then stop. This also aligns with accessibility considerations, as constant motion can be distracting or uncomfortable for some users.

A useful engineering pattern is to budget animation intensity the same way teams budget images. If a page already has multiple rich media elements, animation should be conservative. If a page is simple and text-driven, a small amount of motion can add polish without destabilising the experience.

Test on real devices, not assumptions.

Developer laptops can hide problems because they have strong CPUs and fast network connections. Real-world testing should include older phones, mid-range Android devices, and tablets because these reveal the common failure modes: dropped frames, delayed interaction, and scroll stutter. Testing should happen with production-like content, not placeholder blocks, because heavy pages behave differently from lightweight prototypes.

If animation is part of the brand identity, it can still be performance-safe, but only when it is treated as a feature that must meet constraints. A motion system that respects device limits is an advantage, because it communicates quality without making the site feel fragile.

Test on real mobile conditions.

A site that performs well on office Wi-Fi can still perform poorly on an actual mobile network. Latency, bandwidth variability, and radio transitions can change the experience dramatically. Routine testing under realistic conditions reveals problems early, before users report them through drop-offs and abandoned sessions.

Mobile performance is the default reality, not an edge case.

Measure with accessible tooling.

Tools such as Google PageSpeed Insights and GTmetrix can highlight high-impact issues, including oversized images, render-blocking resources, and slow server responses. These tools are not perfect truth, but they are useful for trend tracking and prioritisation. The most valuable use is consistency: measure regularly, compare results, then confirm improvements with real device behaviour.

Performance metrics are most actionable when they are tied to user-facing experience. A score is less important than knowing which change improves the time to usable content. Teams benefit from translating reports into plain decisions: which assets can be reduced, which scripts can be removed, which templates can be simplified.

Simulate network constraints during development.

Modern browser developer tools can throttle network conditions to approximate slower connections. This helps identify bottlenecks such as oversized hero images, heavy fonts, or scripts that delay first interaction. Simulation is not a replacement for real testing, but it catches obvious issues earlier, before they become embedded in a design system.

Latency matters as much as bandwidth. A page can be lightweight but still feel slow if it depends on multiple sequential requests to become interactive. Reducing dependency chains and parallelising where possible helps the site behave better when the network is unpredictable.

Watch behaviour during peak load and busy periods.

Traffic spikes can expose problems that do not appear in quiet testing. When many users arrive at once, server response times can degrade, and third-party services can throttle. Testing during busy periods helps teams understand whether performance issues are local to the site or caused by external dependencies.

For organisations using multiple platforms in the stack, this is where integration discipline matters. If content workflows rely on external services to render critical parts of a page, peak load can break user experience. Reducing reliance on runtime calls and caching stable content where possible lowers risk.

Collect user feedback as a diagnostic input.

User feedback can reveal patterns that tools miss, such as specific device models that struggle or regions where latency is consistently higher. Feedback becomes more useful when it is structured: device type, browser, page URL, and a short description of what felt slow. This transforms “it is slow” into actionable insight.

When teams adopt a habit of responding to performance feedback as they would respond to functional bugs, overall quality rises. Speed becomes part of the product standard, not an optional improvement.

Layer modern delivery techniques.

Once obvious bloat is controlled, performance improvements come from delivery architecture: how content is served, cached, and transmitted. Many sites plateau because they only optimise images and then stop. Modern performance requires making the whole delivery pipeline efficient, from server response to browser caching behaviour.

Delivery is where good sites become reliably fast.

Use a content delivery network when appropriate.

A CDN reduces latency by serving assets from locations closer to the user. This can make a noticeable difference for global audiences, particularly for static files such as images, scripts, and stylesheets. The value is not only speed; it is also resilience, because distributed delivery can reduce the impact of regional slowdowns.

CDN use should still be paired with good asset hygiene. A CDN will deliver large files quickly, but it will not remove the cost of downloading them. That is why this layer works best after media and script budgets are already under control.

Adopt efficient transport when available.

Modern protocols such as HTTP/2 improve efficiency by allowing better request multiplexing and reducing overhead. Teams do not always control transport directly when using hosted platforms, but they can still benefit from understanding it. If a site loads many small assets, efficient transport can reduce the “waiting for requests” feeling that comes from serial loading patterns.

Transport improvements are not a substitute for reducing assets, but they can reduce friction once the page is already reasonably lean. When combined with fewer third-party calls and smarter caching, protocol efficiency becomes part of a stable performance baseline.

Cache intelligently for repeat visits.

Browser caching allows repeat visitors to load faster because stable assets are stored locally. This is particularly useful for returning readers, customers browsing product ranges, or teams using web apps daily. When caching is configured well, repeat navigation feels instant because only new content needs to be downloaded.

Server-side caching can also reduce load on origin infrastructure by serving precomputed responses instead of regenerating them for every request. Even without deep infrastructure control, teams can still leverage caching opportunities by reducing dynamic rendering requirements and keeping frequently accessed content stable.

Keep the codebase lean and maintainable.

Performance degradation often happens gradually when code and content accumulate without regular clean-up. A tidy codebase is easier to optimise because unnecessary scripts, unused styles, and redundant components are visible. Refactoring is not only an engineering preference; it directly impacts speed because it removes work the browser no longer needs to do.

When a team maintains multiple Squarespace sites or multiple embedded tools, governance becomes even more important. Where possible, shared patterns and documented rules reduce performance drift. Tools such as Cx+ style plugin libraries can help when they standardise behaviour and avoid ad-hoc embeds, but only when their usage is disciplined and aligned with performance budgets.

Maintain performance as a habit.

Performance is not a one-off project; it is an operating standard. User expectations rise over time, devices diversify, and content teams naturally add more assets. Sites that stay fast treat performance as part of regular maintenance, with measurable checks and clear constraints on what is allowed to ship.

Performance is a workflow, not a clean-up task.

Define budgets and enforce them.

A budget might include maximum image weight per page, maximum number of external scripts, and a target for how quickly the main content becomes usable. Budgets create clarity because they turn subjective debates into objective constraints. When a new feature exceeds the budget, the conversation shifts from “should this be added” to “what must be removed or redesigned to make it fit”.

Budgets also protect teams from accidental regressions. When performance checks are part of a release routine, slowdowns are caught early. This is especially valuable for small teams who cannot afford reactive performance firefighting every time a new embed is installed.

Prioritise mobile-first design decisions.

Mobile-first design tends to produce better performance outcomes because it forces teams to start with constraints. If a page works well on mobile, it usually works well everywhere. This includes designing with touch interaction in mind, avoiding oversized media as decorative filler, and limiting heavy scripts that do not materially improve the mobile experience.

Mobile-first does not mean “mobile only”. It means starting with the hardest environment and scaling up. The result is usually a cleaner interface, faster interaction, and fewer unnecessary features that were only justified by desktop comfort.

Keep optimisation aligned with user intent.

Not every page needs the same performance strategy. A landing page might need to prioritise immediate clarity and minimal distractions. A long-form article might prioritise readability, stable layout, and delayed loading for non-critical images. A store page might prioritise quick product information and reliable interaction controls. Intent-based optimisation avoids blanket rules that do not fit the context.

Performance work becomes more effective when it is linked to user goals: reading, comparing, purchasing, or learning. When teams understand what the user is trying to achieve, they can remove anything that does not support that goal. That is how performance improvements translate into reduced bounce, stronger engagement, and better outcomes without relying on hype.

With performance fundamentals in place, the next layer is operational consistency: how content is structured, how sections are loaded, and how navigation systems reduce time-to-information so users reach what they need without extra page weight.

---

---

Play section audio

Transitioning to Fluid Engine.

How Fluid Engine differs.

Moving from the classic Squarespace editor to Fluid Engine is less like a cosmetic update and more like changing how pages are constructed. The older editor encouraged a predictable, linear flow because blocks largely behaved as a stacked layout system. The newer approach introduces more spatial control, which can unlock stronger visual storytelling, but it also increases the number of ways a layout can drift off-course.

The key behavioural shift is that the classic editor acted like a guard rail. It limited placement options, which reduced the chance of misalignment and accidental overlap. Fluid Engine reduces those guard rails and expects the builder to make more deliberate choices about alignment, spacing, and content hierarchy. When that intention is present, results look bespoke without needing extensive code. When it is absent, pages can become inconsistent across sections and screen sizes.

What actually changes.

Layout freedom is also layout responsibility.

Fluid Engine supports freeform positioning, including controlled overlaps, which can produce editorial-style compositions. In practical terms, that means a text block can be placed with more precision in relation to an image, a call-to-action can sit exactly where attention is strongest, and a design can feel less templated. The trade-off is that small placement decisions can create knock-on effects, especially when content is edited later or translated into other languages with different word lengths.

• Fluid Engine supports element overlap; the classic editor generally does not.

• Layouts can be tuned independently for desktop and mobile via a responsive workflow.

• A defined grid guides placement while still allowing more creative control.

• Classic editor behaviour is more rigid, which often reduces layout surprises.

Where it is available.

Availability matters because a transition plan only works when a site owner knows which areas can be upgraded, which areas are already using the new system, and which areas are excluded. On Squarespace 7.1, Fluid Engine is available across block-based sections, which means it can affect most modern page builds. This includes areas that were historically treated as “special” layouts, such as footers and portfolio content.

It is equally important to recognise the boundary: Squarespace 7.0 does not support Fluid Engine. That limitation is not a small toggle, because the two versions have different site architecture and editing capabilities. Teams operating on 7.0 must consider a version migration if Fluid Engine is a requirement, and that decision should be approached as a controlled project rather than an impulsive upgrade.

• Fluid Engine is available for block sections on 7.1 sites.

• It can apply to footers and portfolio projects where those areas are block-based.

• New sections on 7.1 default to the Fluid Engine experience.

How to confirm it.

Before changing anything, a site owner benefits from a fast verification method. The simplest operational check is visual: when editing a page, Fluid Engine presents an “Add Block” control and a grid appears while blocks are dragged. That grid feedback is not decoration, it is a direct hint about how positioning will behave.

Confirmation also helps with team alignment. When multiple people touch a site, confusion often appears when one person describes a layout problem that only exists in one editor mode. Establishing whether a section is Fluid Engine or not prevents miscommunication and reduces time lost to troubleshooting the wrong system.

Upgrading without surprises.

Upgrading existing sections is where the risk profile changes. The upgrade process can be straightforward, but the consequences are not always reversible. Once a classic section is upgraded and saved, it cannot be switched back to its previous editor state. That “one-way door” is why upgrades should be treated like change management rather than a casual click.

A safe process begins with duplication. A duplicated section preserves the original layout, content arrangement, and historical behaviour, which creates a fallback when an upgrade introduces unexpected spacing, stacking, or alignment changes. Duplicates are also useful for experimentation because the team can test bold layout ideas without damaging production pages.

Upgrade checklist.

Duplicate, upgrade, validate, then commit.

1. Duplicate the section first to preserve an untouched reference.

2. Upgrade the duplicate and treat it as the working draft.

3. Validate alignment across key breakpoints and devices.

4. Check whether buttons, forms, and embedded elements still behave correctly.

5. Only then replace the original or replicate the final placement choices.

Edge cases show up most often when a section contains tightly aligned text over imagery, complex columns, or dense stacks of elements that were previously constrained by the classic editor. In those cases, the upgrade can subtly shift spacing, alter stacking order, or create small overlaps that only appear on specific screen widths. Testing is not optional, because a layout can appear perfect on a desktop canvas yet become awkward on a mid-size laptop or a large mobile device.

Designing for desktop and mobile.

The ability to adjust layouts separately across device views is one of Fluid Engine’s most powerful benefits, and also one of its most common sources of inconsistency. When builders create a strong desktop design and then attempt to “shrink it” into mobile, results can feel cramped, especially when multiple overlaps and tight alignments are involved.

A more reliable approach is to treat mobile as its own layout problem and solve it intentionally. Desktop design often rewards breadth and negative space, while mobile design rewards clarity, vertical rhythm, and predictable reading flow. Fluid Engine supports this approach, but only if the builder actively checks each view and makes purposeful decisions.

Practical layout patterns.

Design principles travel better than exact positions.

• Keep a consistent content hierarchy: headline, supporting copy, then action.

• Use spacing to signal grouping, rather than relying on overlap for emphasis.

• Avoid fragile alignments that depend on exact line breaks in text.

• Expect headings to wrap differently on mobile, especially with longer words.

Long-form text introduces a specific risk: edits change block height, which can cause overlaps that previously looked intentional to become collisions. This is more likely when marketing teams update headlines seasonally, when a page is localised, or when a new product name is longer than the old one. The safest pattern is to leave breathing room around text blocks that sit near other elements, especially when overlapping is used.

Consistency, accessibility, performance.

Fluid Engine can produce striking pages, but the output still needs to behave like a professional website rather than a static poster. That means consistency, accessibility, and performance have to be actively considered. The editor makes it easy to create a layout that looks impressive in the builder view, yet underperforms for real visitors if readability, navigation, and load efficiency are ignored.

Accessibility foundations.

Good design remains usable under constraints.

Accessibility is easiest to maintain when it is treated as a baseline rather than a later fix. Text should remain legible, contrast should be sufficient, and interactive elements should be clear. Overlap is where accessibility can quietly fail, for example when text sits on imagery with inconsistent contrast across the image surface. In those cases, what looks fine in one screenshot can become difficult to read as the page responds to different widths.

• Ensure body text remains readable with adequate contrast.

• Keep interactive elements visually distinct and spaced for touch use.

• Use descriptive link text so navigation makes sense out of context.

• Avoid placing essential copy in positions that can be obscured by overlap.

Performance considerations.

Complex layouts should not become heavy pages.

Fluid Engine makes it tempting to layer multiple images, effects, and overlapping elements. The performance risk appears when these choices increase visual complexity without a clear user benefit. Large media assets, excessive animations, and dense stacking can increase load time and reduce responsiveness, especially on mobile connections. A stable rule is that design flourishes should earn their place by improving comprehension or directing attention, not by existing purely for decoration.

Overlap can also create hidden problems in interaction. If an invisible part of a block sits on top of a button, it can capture clicks and make the button feel broken. This is the kind of issue that often slips through when testing is limited to a single device. A quick interaction pass, clicking every link and button in both desktop and mobile views, catches most of these collisions.

When to use custom CSS.

Fluid Engine reduces the need for custom code in many cases, but there are still situations where custom CSS is the right tool. The best use cases are not decorative hacks, but controlled refinements such as tightening typography rhythm, standardising spacing patterns, or aligning visual tokens across a site. When CSS is used to force layout positions that fight the editor, it typically introduces fragility and makes future edits risky.

A practical rule is that CSS should enhance a stable layout rather than rescue an unstable one. If a section relies on CSS to prevent overlaps, to correct unpredictable spacing, or to keep elements aligned after every content edit, the underlying layout decisions likely need revision. In contrast, CSS is highly effective for global consistency, such as ensuring button styles and headings feel cohesive across pages.

Technical depth block.

Editor control and code control are different levers.

Fluid Engine is primarily an editor-level system. It governs how blocks are placed and how those placements respond to screen size. Code-level changes operate after layout is established, meaning CSS can override or refine visual behaviour but cannot reliably replace good structure. When a site also uses platform add-ons like Cx+ plugins, it becomes even more important to keep the layout predictable so enhancements behave consistently across sections and device views.

For teams running a larger operational setup, a stable approach is to define internal build rules, then enforce them with lightweight checks. For example, a team might decide that overlap is only allowed in hero sections, or that every call-to-action must have a minimum touch-safe spacing on mobile. Those constraints protect the site as multiple people make changes over time, and they reduce regressions when pages evolve.

Maximising the workflow.

Fluid Engine rewards a process mindset. The editor’s flexibility is best used when there is a repeatable workflow that supports creativity without letting quality drift. That includes planning, testing, and documenting decisions that matter, such as spacing rules, typography patterns, and how sections behave across devices.

Practical tips that scale.

Build once, then maintain calmly.

1. Start with structure: define the reading flow before refining visuals.

2. Use the grid as a consistency tool, not just a placement helper.

3. Test on at least one real mobile device, not only the editor preview.

4. Run an interaction pass: clicks, forms, menus, and embedded elements.

5. Document patterns that work so future pages reuse proven decisions.

It can also help to separate “design time” from “content time”. When the same session tries to redesign a section and rewrite copy, the layout often becomes reactive to draft text. A calmer method is to finalise content structure first, then design the layout around stable copy. That reduces the chance of overlap failures caused by last-minute headline changes.

As teams mature their workflow, they often benefit from introducing supportive tooling. Some organisations reduce editorial churn by building a self-serve knowledge layer that answers routine questions about layout rules, editor practices, and common fixes. In that context, solutions like CORE can act as an internal concierge for guidance and consistency, but the fundamental win still comes from adopting disciplined layout habits.

Once Fluid Engine is treated as a layout system rather than a creative toy, it becomes easier to build pages that look distinctive, remain maintainable, and perform reliably. The next step is typically to formalise design standards, so new sections inherit consistent spacing, hierarchy, and interaction patterns without constant rework.

---

---

Play section audio

Upgrading sections to Fluid Engine.

Deciding when to upgrade.

Upgrading a section inside Squarespace is not just a cosmetic change. It alters how the layout is constructed, how blocks are positioned, and how spacing behaves across different screen sizes. That shift can be valuable for teams who need more control, but it also introduces new responsibilities that were previously handled by the older editor’s constraints.

A practical way to think about the decision is to treat it like swapping a fixed template for a flexible canvas. More freedom means more ways to build a better layout, and more ways to accidentally create issues that only appear on mobile, only appear when fonts load differently, or only appear when a page is edited months later by someone else.

The strongest reason to upgrade is when a section genuinely needs advanced layout control, such as tighter alignment, intentional layering, or a more deliberate grid. If the classic layout already performs well, loads quickly, and requires minimal maintenance, the upgrade may create more work than benefit. A cautious approach is often the most cost-effective approach.

Initiating the upgrade safely.

Upgrade with intent, not curiosity.

The upgrade process is simple on the surface: a user selects a page, finds the target section, then clicks the Upgrade button in the top-left area of that section. The editor then converts the section from the Classic Editor into the Fluid Engine interface, enabling a more flexible layout model.

The critical operational detail is that the change becomes permanent once the page is saved. In other words, after saving, there is no supported path back to the old editor for that section. That is why the “click” is not the risky step, the “save” is. Teams benefit from treating the first upgrade attempt as a controlled test, not as a live production edit.

Steps to upgrade.

1. Open the page that contains the section.

2. Identify the section intended for conversion.

3. Click the upgrade control in the section’s top-left area.

4. Review the converted layout before committing changes.

5. Save only when the section behaves correctly across devices.

Understanding what changes after conversion.

Many layout surprises come from assuming the new editor “keeps everything the same, but with more options”. In practice, the conversion may reinterpret spacing, block alignment, and how content snaps to a structure. Even if the section looks similar at first glance, small differences can compound into visible misalignment once real-world conditions apply, such as different browser widths, longer headings, or image aspect ratios.

Conversion can also affect reading flow. A section that previously stacked neatly may now allow blocks to sit nearer or overlap in ways that look clean in one view but cluttered in another. That is not a fault of the editor, it is the natural outcome of increased flexibility. The upgrade is best approached as a redesign pass, even when the goal is to keep the original look.

Anticipating layout shifts.

More flexibility increases both quality and risk.

After conversion, the most common issue is that the section no longer matches the original alignment. A heading might drift slightly off its previous centre point, an image might appear too close to text, or a call-to-action button might no longer feel visually anchored. These shifts typically happen because the new layout system uses different rules for positioning and spacing.

Device behaviour should be checked early rather than late. A section that looks perfect on desktop can feel cramped on mobile if blocks compress unexpectedly, or if the spacing that once existed is now interpreted differently. Testing should not be a final step, it should be part of the edit loop.

Testing upgraded sections.

• Check visual consistency across desktop, tablet, and mobile widths.

• Confirm text remains readable without awkward line breaks.

• Verify images retain sensible cropping and do not dominate the viewport.

• Ensure interactive items are still easy to tap and use.

Preserving the original layout first.

Before upgrading, duplicating the section is a low-effort safeguard with high value. It provides a reference point, a fallback option, and a direct comparison for what changed. It also supports experimentation without fear, which is usually where the best layouts come from.

Duplication also supports operational resilience. If a team needs to roll out multiple upgrades across a site, the duplicated version can act as a baseline library of “pre-upgrade” snapshots. That helps when a stakeholder later asks why something looks different, or when a future editor needs to understand the old structure.

How to duplicate sections.

1. Open the page that contains the section.

2. Use the section controls to locate the duplicate option.

3. Create the duplicate and confirm it appears as expected.

4. Upgrade the duplicated section, not the original.

5. Remove the unused version only after final validation.

Using Fluid Engine features well.

Once upgraded, the editor becomes a layout tool rather than a simple content arranger. The ability to move blocks freely can quickly improve structure, but it also requires consistent habits. A reliable method is to place key blocks first, then adjust spacing, then refine alignment. Random adjustments in the middle of a build often create hard-to-diagnose inconsistencies later.

One of the most practical tools is the grid system, which helps maintain alignment even when designs become more complex. When blocks are positioned with reference to a grid rather than by eye, the result is usually more stable across device widths and more consistent when content changes.

Best practices for everyday edits.

• Use drag and drop with small, deliberate moves rather than large jumps.

• Align blocks to shared edges to reduce visual noise.

• Keep spacing rules consistent within a section so it reads as one system.

• Preview frequently, especially after changing image sizes or typography.

Responsive behaviour that actually holds up.

Build structure first, style second.

Responsive design is where the new editor can either shine or cause friction. The goal is not simply to “make it fit” on smaller screens, but to maintain clarity, hierarchy, and scan-ability. A common edge case is a desktop layout that relies on tight horizontal relationships between blocks, which can collapse awkwardly on mobile if not rethought.

It helps to think in terms of intentional breakpoints. When a layout changes at certain widths, content should still feel like it was designed for that size rather than squeezed into it. When teams treat mobile layouts as first-class designs, upgrades produce a stronger overall result.

Post-upgrade issues and quick fixes.

After conversion, issues usually fall into a few predictable categories: layout drift, missing spacing, broken interactions, or content that no longer reads cleanly. Fixes are usually available inside the editor, but they require a systematic approach. Randomly nudging blocks can mask the symptom without addressing the underlying layout logic.

Interactive checks should be taken seriously. A section can look correct yet still fail in function if buttons, links, or forms behave unexpectedly. The most efficient habit is to test functionality immediately after visual adjustments, because the cause is easier to trace while edits are fresh.

Troubleshooting tips.

• Use preview mode to validate behaviour before publishing.

• Check for layout changes caused by font loading or long text values.

• Confirm interactive elements such as buttons, links, and forms still work end-to-end.

• If an issue persists, consult platform documentation or community discussions for known patterns.

Accessibility and long-term maintainability.

Good layout is not only about appearance, it is also about usability. Layout freedom can accidentally harm accessibility if it creates unclear reading order, cramped tap targets, or confusing hierarchy. Even without deep technical expertise, teams can improve outcomes by prioritising readability, clear spacing, and logical grouping.

Maintainability matters because most websites are edited repeatedly over time. A clean, consistent layout is easier for future editors to adjust without breaking. If a site is supported by ongoing operational workflows, a structured approach can be reinforced with maintenance routines such as Pro Subs, where stability, content consistency, and ongoing refinement become part of the process rather than a last-minute fix.

For teams that rely on extended functionality beyond the native platform, upgrades should be checked against any existing enhancements. For example, if a site uses Cx+ plugins to modify UI behaviour, navigation, or section interactions, it is sensible to validate that the upgraded layouts still support the expected structure. The goal is not to avoid upgrades, it is to ensure upgraded sections remain compatible with the broader site system.

Operational workflow for smoother upgrades.

Upgrade the layout, protect the system.

A repeatable workflow reduces stress and improves quality. When upgrades are treated as a process, teams spend less time firefighting and more time refining. A useful approach is to standardise how sections are duplicated, how tests are run, and how changes are documented. Even a lightweight log of what changed and why can prevent confusion months later.

When multiple sections are being upgraded across a site, consistency becomes more important than creativity. A site can look “designed” even when sections differ, as long as spacing rules, alignment habits, and hierarchy are consistent. That consistency is what users feel as professionalism, even if they cannot describe it.

The upgrade path works best when each converted section ends with a final pass that checks layout, checks function, and checks readability across devices. Once that becomes habit, Fluid Engine stops feeling risky and starts feeling like what it is meant to be: a flexible, practical tool for building a more deliberate digital experience.

---

---

Play section audio

Next steps with Fluid Engine.

Use freedom without losing structure.

Fluid Engine makes it possible to build layouts that feel designed rather than templated, but that flexibility only stays valuable when it is paired with consistent rules. A page can look impressive in the editor and still fail in the real world if elements collide, spacing becomes irregular, or the reading path is unclear. The practical objective is not maximum creativity; it is repeatable clarity across pages, devices, and future edits.

In most projects, layout issues appear less because the tool is weak and more because the system around it is undefined. When a site has no agreed spacing scale, no alignment conventions, and no shared approach to how content should “flow”, every new section becomes a one-off decision. Over time, that creates a patchwork experience where some pages feel calm and deliberate while others feel cramped, jumpy, or visually inconsistent.

For teams building on Squarespace, a useful mindset is to treat layout decisions as a design system, even if it is lightweight. That can be as simple as defining a small set of layout principles and applying them repeatedly: consistent gutters, consistent vertical rhythm, predictable heading patterns, and a clear hierarchy for primary and secondary actions. Once those rules exist, the editor becomes a fast execution tool rather than a place where every decision is re-litigated.

Practical consistency rules.

Stability beats novelty when traffic matters.

• Keep a small set of section patterns and reuse them across pages before creating new ones.

• Use alignment as the default, and treat intentional misalignment as an exception with a reason.

• Prefer clear content grouping over decorative density, especially near key conversion points.

• When a layout relies on tight positioning, document why, so future edits do not break it.

Build a recurring layout QA routine.

Separate desktop and mobile design controls are powerful, but they also introduce a second surface area for mistakes. A layout that looks polished on a laptop can become confusing on a phone if content order changes, spacing collapses, or text wraps in an awkward way. A sustainable site treats layout review as maintenance rather than a one-time setup task.

Routine review works best when it is operationalised. Instead of waiting for complaints or noticing a problem after performance drops, the team can adopt a repeatable schedule: quick checks after major edits, deeper checks monthly, and a structured audit quarterly. That cadence prevents small layout drift from compounding into a full redesign later.

It also helps to define what “done” means for a page. If a page is considered complete only when it passes a visual check on a shortlist of devices and a content-order check on mobile, quality stops being subjective. The team moves from “it looks fine in the editor” to “it works in the environments that matter”.

A simple QA checklist.

One checklist, every release.

1. Check the page at common widths and confirm that key sections still read in the intended order.

2. Scan for overlaps, clipped text, or elements that sit too close to each other under scroll.

3. Validate spacing consistency between sections, especially around headings and calls to action.

4. Confirm that interactive elements are easy to tap and do not sit too close together on mobile.

5. Re-check any sections with background images, videos, or layered elements after edits.

Test the mechanics behind the visuals.

Many layout issues are not “design taste” problems; they are mechanical problems that show up under specific conditions. Long titles, translated text, dynamic content, and accessibility settings can all change how a section renders. Treating these as normal realities rather than edge cases prevents fragile layouts.

Text wrapping is a common culprit. A heading that fits neatly in one language or with one line length can wrap differently when a blog title changes, when a product name becomes longer, or when a page is updated with more descriptive copy. A stable layout assumes text will expand and still remain readable, rather than relying on exact line breaks.

Layering can also introduce subtle failures. When elements are stacked visually, the rendering order and overlap behaviour can change as the viewport shifts. If a design depends on stacking, it is worth understanding how z-index and element boundaries behave, because a small change to spacing or position can unexpectedly hide buttons, block links, or cause text to sit beneath images.

Spacing mistakes often come from mixing inconsistent units of intent. A section might look balanced because its paddings, margins, and block spacing accidentally align on desktop, but the same relationships break on mobile. This is where basic responsive design thinking helps: keep spacing decisions intentional, consistent, and test them where they are most likely to fail.

Common failure patterns to catch early.

• Headings or buttons that become two lines and push important content below the fold.

• Images that crop well on desktop but cut off key details on mobile.

• Stacked elements that look layered but create unreadable text contrast in one viewport.

• Sections that become excessively long on mobile because content order is not curated.

Optimise mobile as a first-class layout.

Mobile design is no longer a secondary concern, because the majority of browsing for many sites happens through phones. A page can be beautiful on desktop and still underperform if the mobile experience forces excessive scrolling, hides key information, or creates friction around navigation and actions. Treating mobile as a first-class layout is less about shrinking the desktop version and more about respecting how people consume information on small screens.

A practical starting point is content hierarchy. On mobile, the page should reveal what the user needs sooner, with fewer distractions. If a section’s desktop layout relies on side-by-side content, the mobile stack should still communicate priority: what comes first, what can be skimmed, and what is supporting detail.

Tap behaviour matters as well. Links and buttons that are easy to click with a mouse can become frustrating on mobile if they are too close together or if the clickable area is small. That is partly design, but it is also usability engineering. When conversion steps exist, the layout should remove uncertainty and minimise accidental taps.

Mobile layout improvements with high leverage.

Shorter scroll, clearer choices.

• Bring the page’s main promise or outcome higher on the screen, even if the desktop layout leads with imagery.

• Reduce decorative spacing that adds scroll without adding meaning, especially between repeated sections.

• Group related items into tighter clusters so scanning does not feel like searching.

• Ensure action buttons have clear separation and do not compete with secondary links.

Use data to guide layout decisions.

Visual judgement is useful, but it becomes far more reliable when it is paired with measurement. A layout can feel “clean” and still lead to poor engagement if users do not scroll, do not find what they need, or abandon the page before taking action. The practical goal is to connect design decisions to observable behaviour, not guesswork.

Basic analytics can already reveal a lot: which pages have high exit rates, which devices dominate traffic, and where users stop progressing. When teams use this information, layout work becomes targeted. Instead of redesigning everything, they focus on the sections that correlate with drop-offs and friction.

Performance metrics matter too, because layout is not just how a page looks; it is also how stable it feels while loading. When assets shift around during load, users experience a lack of trust, even if they cannot name the reason. This is where web performance concepts like Cumulative Layout Shift become relevant, because they capture whether content moves unexpectedly while the page renders.

Similarly, load speed affects perceived quality. Large hero images, background videos, and heavy scripts can create delay that users interpret as unreliability. Monitoring indicators such as Largest Contentful Paint gives teams a clearer view of whether layout choices are harming real usability, even when the page looks perfect in a controlled environment.

Data-driven actions that avoid guesswork.

1. Identify the top pages by traffic and validate they are stable on mobile before redesigning lower-impact areas.

2. Compare engagement and exits by device type to prioritise mobile layout refinements when needed.

3. Track pages with heavy media and verify that load behaviour does not cause visible shifting.

4. Use small, isolated changes and re-check behaviour rather than performing large redesigns without measurement.

Make user feedback part of iteration.

Analytics explains what people do, but it does not always explain why. Direct feedback helps reveal confusion, uncertainty, and friction that numbers alone cannot describe. Even a small amount of structured feedback can surface patterns, especially when it is collected consistently and reviewed with intent.

Simple usability testing can be lightweight. A team does not need a formal lab environment to learn. Observing a small number of users attempting a task can reveal whether navigation feels intuitive, whether content order makes sense on mobile, and whether the page’s structure matches real expectations. The objective is not perfection; it is discovering the most common points of friction and resolving them.

Feedback also helps avoid a common trap: designing for the editor rather than for the audience. When teams only interact with their site as builders, they can unintentionally create patterns that make sense to them but not to visitors. Regular feedback keeps the focus on clarity, comprehension, and trust.

Low-effort ways to capture useful feedback.

• Ask a small set of people to find specific information and narrate what they expect to happen next.

• Review support emails or common questions and map them to pages where clarity is missing.

• Collect short qualitative notes after major layout changes and compare them to engagement shifts.

Keep learning with practical sources.

Tools evolve, and so do the patterns that work best. Staying informed about updates, known limitations, and emerging best practices reduces wasted effort and prevents repeating mistakes that others have already solved. Product documentation and community discussion can act as an early warning system for changes that affect layout behaviour.

It helps to treat community spaces as a practical library rather than as entertainment. When someone shares a method to handle a specific layout issue, the team can test it in a controlled way, document what works, and add the outcome to their internal guidelines. Over time, that creates a project-specific playbook that is more valuable than generic advice.

When community knowledge is used carefully, it also accelerates troubleshooting. Instead of repeatedly reworking a section by intuition, teams can identify known constraints, typical fixes, and safer patterns for future builds. That approach shortens the feedback loop and keeps design time focused on outcomes rather than on repeated trial and error.

Design for maintainability, not heroics.

A site that performs well over time is not the one that required the most effort once; it is the one that remains easy to update without breaking. Maintainability depends on predictable patterns and clean structure. When a page is built with too many special cases, the next update can introduce defects simply because the layout is fragile.

Where enhancement is needed beyond native capabilities, it is worth thinking in layers. Layout should handle structure, while behaviour enhancements should be added intentionally and tested after deployment. Codified add-ons, such as Cx+ style plugins, can add helpful interaction patterns, but they still rely on stable underlying layout decisions. If the layout is inconsistent, even well-built enhancements can appear broken or misaligned.

Ongoing care can also be systematised. In some organisations, a maintenance layer exists where a team periodically reviews performance, fixes drift, and makes targeted improvements. That is similar in spirit to a Pro Subs style maintenance routine, where operational reliability is treated as part of the product rather than an afterthought. The important principle is not the label; it is the habit of treating the site as a living system.

Maintainability habits that reduce future risk.

Build once, edit safely.

• Prefer reusable section patterns over one-off layouts that require special knowledge to maintain.

• Document the intent behind unusual positioning so future editors do not “correct” it accidentally.

• After adding new features or scripts, re-check mobile behaviour and load stability immediately.

• Keep improvements incremental so changes can be traced and reversed if needed.

Progress comes from iteration.

Strong websites are rarely the result of a single perfect build. They are the result of consistent iteration that improves clarity, reduces friction, and strengthens trust over time. When layout work is approached as a cycle of design, test, measure, and refine, it stops being an emotional judgement and becomes a disciplined practice.

There is also value in recognising progress. When a team resolves a layout issue that reduced bounce, improved readability, or made mobile navigation smoother, that improvement is real operational progress. Celebrating small wins helps sustain the discipline required for ongoing refinement, especially when web design work can feel endless.

With the right routines, the flexibility of modern editing tools becomes a long-term advantage rather than a recurring source of complexity. The next step is not a dramatic overhaul; it is a repeatable process that keeps the site coherent, performant, and easy to evolve as content and goals change.

Frequently Asked Questions.

What is Fluid Engine?

Fluid Engine is a flexible design tool within Squarespace that allows users to create custom layouts with greater control over the placement of elements.

How does Fluid Engine differ from the classic editor?

Fluid Engine allows for overlapping elements and independent design adjustments for desktop and mobile, unlike the classic editor, which has a more structured approach.

Can I revert back to the classic editor after upgrading?

No, once a section is upgraded to Fluid Engine, it cannot be reverted back to the classic editor.

What are the best practices for using Fluid Engine?

Best practices include maintaining consistent spacing, ensuring accessibility, optimising performance, and regularly testing layouts across devices.

How can I optimise images for Fluid Engine?

Use image compression tools, implement responsive images, and consider lazy loading to enhance load times and performance.

What should I consider when transitioning to Fluid Engine?

Consider duplicating sections before upgrading, testing for layout changes, and familiarising yourself with the new features of Fluid Engine.

How can I ensure my site is accessible?

Ensure meaningful headings, maintain a logical reading order, use sufficient contrast, and provide keyboard usability for all interactive elements.

What tools can help with performance testing?

Tools like Google PageSpeed Insights and GTmetrix can provide insights into your website's performance and suggest areas for improvement.

How can I stay updated on Fluid Engine features?

Follow Squarespace’s official blog, participate in community forums, and engage with other users to stay informed about updates and best practices.

What role does user feedback play in design?

User feedback is crucial for identifying pain points and areas for improvement, helping to create a more user-friendly experience.

References

Thank you for taking the time to read this lecture. Hopefully, this has provided you with insight to assist your career or business.

1. Squarespace. (n.d.). Fluid Engine – Drag and Drop Website Editor. Squarespace. https://www.squarespace.com/websites/fluid-engine

2. Squarespace. (2025, November 12). Editing your site with Fluid Engine. Squarespace Support. https://support.squarespace.com/hc/en-us/articles/6421525446541-Editing-your-site-with-Fluid-Engine

3. Local Creative Co. (2022, July 26). What is Fluid Engine? And Should You Upgrade Your Squarespace Website? Local Creative Co. https://localcreative.co/blog/squarespace-fluid-engine/

4. Dekle, K. (2022, July 22). Fluid Engine: the NEW page editor in Squarespace. Launch the Damn Thing. https://www.launchthedamnthing.com/blog/fluid-engine-new

5. The Styled Square. (2022, July 18). Squarespace 7.1 Fluid Engine Builder. The Styled Square. https://www.thestyledsquare.com/blog-content/squarespace-71s-fluid-engine-builder

6. Hello Lovely Design and Co. (2022, October 2). What's Squarespace Fluid Engine, and do you need it? Hello Lovely Design and Co. https://www.hellolovely.design/tipsandtricks/fluid-engine

7. Squarespace Engineering. (2022, August 31). Developing Fluid Engine. Squarespace Engineering Blog. https://engineering.squarespace.com/blog/2022/developing-fluid-engine

8. O'Reilly, L. (2022, August 22). Should I use Fluid Engine in Squarespace? Designs for Growth. https://www.designsforgrowth.ie/blog/should-i-use-fluid-engine-in-squarespace

9. Jordanne Co. (n.d.). Honest thoughts on Squarespace's new Fluid Engine. Jordanne Co. https://www.jordanne.co/squarespace-fe/

10. Mayrhofer, E. (2024, June 11). 8 things I love about Squarespace Fluid Engine and 1 big thing I don’t. Eleanor Mayrhofer. https://www.eleanormayrhofer.com/blog/8-things-i-love-about-squarespace-fluid-engine-and-1-big-thing-i-dont

Key components mentioned

This lecture referenced a range of named technologies, systems, standards bodies, and platforms that collectively map how modern web experiences are built, delivered, measured, and governed. The list below is included as a transparency index of the specific items mentioned.

ProjektID solutions and learning:

• CORE [Content Optimised Results Engine] - https://www.projektid.co/core

• Cx+ [Customer Experience Plus] - https://www.projektid.co/cxplus

• DAVE [Dynamic Assisting Virtual Entity] - https://www.projektid.co/dave

• Extensions - https://www.projektid.co/extensions

• Intel +1 [Intelligence +1] - https://www.projektid.co/intel-plus1

• Pro Subs [Professional Subscriptions] - https://www.projektid.co/professional-subscriptions

Web standards, languages, and experience considerations:

• Accessible Rich Internet Applications (ARIA)

• CSS

• CSS Grid

• Cumulative Layout Shift

• Document Object Model (DOM)

• flexbox

• HTML

• Largest Contentful Paint

• srcset

• WCAG

• WebP

Protocols and network foundations:

• HTTP/2

Platforms and implementation tooling:

• Figma - https://www.figma.com/

• Google PageSpeed Insights - https://pagespeed.web.dev/

• GTmetrix - https://gtmetrix.com/

• Lighthouse - https://developer.chrome.com/docs/lighthouse/

• Squarespace - https://www.squarespace.com/

Devices and computing history references:

• Windows

Accessibility testing and assistive technologies:

• JAWS

• NVDA

• VoiceOver

---