With break-point modes, we do have the freedom of keeping those objects out of canvas which are not required for mobile mode and vice versa. Similarly, can we selectively have different objects in different modes using FLUID BOXES?
So you can do one or more of several things to customize the view for different devices. Unlike breakpoint style responsive design there is no way to move an object off the stage for a certain device. You can set an object or a child level fluid box to be optional. When the screen size drops below a certain percentage which you set on the parent fluid wrap options that object or child level fluid box disappears. Here is an example where the optional content (the cutout character) disappears when there isn't enough space to display it.
One alternative to this is to use advanced actions and look at the system variable cpInfoMobileOS and have it navigate to different versions of the same slide depending on the value of cpinfoMobileOS.
Desktop = 0
iOS = 1
Android = 2
Thanks Paul. Also, I will try using the variable cpInfoMobileOS and see how it works out for me.
What you are pointing out is the reason why I label responsive projects with Breakpoints full responsive, whereas Fluid Bpxes projects are sort of hybrid between a non-responsive project published as scalable HTML5. Not fully responsive because you cannot replace items for lower browser resolutions, only make them optional.
Have a look at my comparison:
True! I feel working with Breakpoints mode gives me more freedom, especially when having different content for desktop and mobile views.
Using advanced actions based on a system variable (I am labeled the Queen of Advanced/Shared actions) is real overkill for a responsive project with Fluid Boxes. You cannot have stacked objects in fluid boxes, hence this would be possible in the slide itself (one of the many limitations of fludi boxes). If you have to create a lot of extra slides, it means a much bigger file size which is not recommendable if the course is deployed for mobile devices as well. Moreover I learned that many advanced actions will slow down as well, replaing them with shared actions can improtve that, but is not always possible.
As I wrote in my blog, development time for Breakpoint Views projects is definitely higher than for Fluid Boxes projects. But if you want really simplified layouts for devices with smaller browser resolution and less resources you need to switch to Breakpoints only way.
In the instance I'm referencing I wanted to have two versions of a slide that was showing the screen of a smartphone. On the desktop version of the slide, I designed it to appear on a mockup of a smartphone to illustrate that this view was what the end user would see on a smartphone. In the case where the learner was viewing the training on a smartphone, I didn't want to show a picture of a smartphone on a smartphone so I made a version fo the slide where the screen filled the screen. I used something similar to the following advanced action to make it work. I didn't really see it as overkill as the results were really nice and the client appreciated the small but extra effort.
OP wanted more control for replacing objets for mobile devices, not only for one slide. Having a multitude of extra slides and advanced action sis overkill as I stated, when you have a Captivate workflow which offers full control/
More possible issues: you need to set up navigation, some system variables wil be messed up since you have more slides than the user will view. Moreover if it is a SCORM you have to be careful with settin gup requirements based on slides visited. Branch aware is not a solution, because it has its own limitations.
Lieve, I'm just trying to help. The OP didn't say this was for one slide or many so I put out my suggestion. It's their question. Why not let them decide what works for them.