Critique request: x01

[Headless]

m wrote:

Don't cross post replies please.

http://bobby.watchfire.com:80/bobby/html/en/gls/g35.html
which explains why links should be seperated with more than whitespace.

Bobby's advice should be ignored in this case (and many other cases).
Using the pipe or any other character to "separate" links is dumb.


Headless

 

[William Tasso]

...
< http://x01.co.uk/frontend/ >

Just looking for nitpicks, really.

fixed width design is unnecessary

Do your worst (oh, but be gentle,
please)! *hides* )

was that genle enough?

;o)

 

[William Tasso]

I don't understand this - it's still valid markup; the page validates
as XHTML 1.0 Strict. Why so down on <i> and <b>? )

The issue has been discussed a lot - check the archive.

In summary <b>, <i> carry no sematic meaning whereas <strong>,<em> do.

 

[Joel Shepherd]

The issue has been discussed a lot - check the archive.

Yes, it has.

In summary <b>, <i> carry no sematic meaning whereas <strong>,<em> do.

Usually true, with regard to <b> and <i>, but not always. As you said,
check the archives.

(I hasten to add though that if the intention is to indicate emphasis,
that <em> or <strong> are the right choice, not <b> or <i>. No
disagreement there.)

 

[EightNineThree]

Yes, it has.


Usually true, with regard to <b> and <i>, but not always. As you said,
check the archives.

(I hasten to add though that if the intention is to indicate emphasis,
that <em> or <strong> are the right choice, not <b> or <i>. No
disagreement there.)

In addition, if the <b> is used to create a "heading-like" effect, then the
proper <hx> element is most appropriate.
This is a common mistake.

 

[Nick Theodorakis]

Use <strong> instead of <b> and if you use italics, use <em> instead of <i>.

Good advice *if* the text is question is logically emphasized. In this
case, i'm not sure those texts (e.g.,<p><i><b>14th September
2003</b></i></p>) are.

However, to me they look logically like subheadings. I would be
tempted to replace:

<p><i><b>14th September 2003</b></i></p>

with:

<h3>14th September 2003</h3>

and

<div class="heading"><span class="title">Latest News</span></div>

with:

<h2>Latest News</h2>

and then apply the appropriate styling to those elements.

Nick

 

[Toby A Inkster]

Bobby's advice should be ignored in this case (and many other cases).

Bobby's advice makes very good sense. Consider the screen shot below.

http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/scratch/no-printable-characters-between-links.png

Note that the hot pink additions are my own. In area 1, how many links are
there? 6?

* main
* about
* php
* xhtml/css
* scrapbook
* contact

or 4?

* main
* about php
* xhtml/css scrapbook
* contact

Both make sense, and as all the links blend into one, either could be the
case. To prove that there is no discernable difference between this case
and a case where they really *are* all one link, I have highlighted
another region, 2.

Using the pipe or any other character to "separate" links is dumb.

Agreed -- the proper way is to use an unordered list:

<ul class="nav">
<li><a href="#">Main</a></li>
<li><a href="#">About</a></li>
<li>
<a href="#">
<abbr title="PHP: Hypertext Preprocessor">PHP</abbr>
</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="#">
<abbr title="eXtensible Hypertext Markup Language">XHTML</abbr>
/<abbr title="Cascading Style Sheets">CSS</abbr>
</a>
</li>
<li><a href="#">Scrapbook</a></li>
<li><a href="#">Contact</a></li>
</ul>

ul.nav {
border: 1px solid white; /* or whatever colour you're using */
margin: 1em;
padding: 0.5em;
}

ul.nav li {
display: inline;
list-style: none;
margin: 0;
padding: 0 1em;
}

But if this is not possible, using a printable character seperator is a
satisfactory substitute. If you don't like pipes (|), then try asterisks
(*), hyphens (-), pluses (+) or solidi (/).

 

[Andrew Cameron]

Hey, play nicely with Bonnie. You asked for a critique and you got one - no
need to be so sensitive.

I got one that seemed to be picking flaws in things that weren't there - a
colour scheme that is based on personal choice, a domain name that I spent
money on because it was short but she can't seem to remember... my final
question was just a query; if Bonnie finds a site about web development
boring, what she's doing on a web development group giving critiques?

Lots of people have "housekeeping" items on the front page - it's a "latest
news" box. Do a google for "latest news", I think you'll find it's rather
popular. Note how I have asked for further information from other people on
things I didn't understand and have taken on board (and even changed) things
that I agreed with straight away - I'm not averse to criticism. I just
don't think I'm likely to agree with Bonnie, as I dislike her site too -
it's mostly bland (and that's a personal preference issue too). Ah well.

 

[Andrew Cameron]

So many x's and o's on the Internet is what I meant. It's very generic, but
hey, if you like it -- enjoy!

There's only one x and one o in the name. Maybe I should go for a subdomain
of it, like http://127.0.x01.co.uk ;-p

A "work-in-progress" is continual by definition. What do you think "in
progress" means?

I felt that "work in progress" gave the impression of "UNDER CONSTRUCTION!
PLEASE COME BACK LATER! OMGROFL!!!ONEONEONE!!!KTHX" whereas "a continual..."
says "This is intentional, I'm adding content all the time, please enjoy
what's here". Since "work in progress" can mean "under construction" and
some sites do get "finished", it's not continual by definition.

I was trying to help you, but I've lost interest. ; ) LOL.

You find the content of what is going to be a web development mini-zine
boring, yet you're on a web development group - I'm just wondering over the
logic, there...

 

[Headless]

Bobby's advice makes very good sense.

It does not, it suggest replacing one inappropriate way of marking up
with another inappropriate way of marking up.

Agreed -- the proper way is to use an unordered list:
Precisely.

But if this is not possible

It's always possible.

, using a printable character seperator is a
satisfactory substitute. If you don't like pipes (|), then try asterisks
(*), hyphens (-), pluses (+) or solidi (/).

Nope, this is decoration and thus it belongs in the CSS, not in the
content. See A List Apart "Taming lists" article for pointers on how to
do that.


Headless

 

[Bonnie Granat]

Good advice *if* the text is question is logically emphasized. In this
case, i'm not sure those texts (e.g.,<p><i><b>14th September
2003</b></i></p>) are.

However, to me they look logically like subheadings. I would be
tempted to replace:

<p><i><b>14th September 2003</b></i></p>

with:

<h3>14th September 2003</h3>

and

<div class="heading"><span class="title">Latest News</span></div>

with:

<h2>Latest News</h2>

and then apply the appropriate styling to those elements.

Yes. I didn't mean he should use those tags on his page -- I was just
following up with the other poster's advice in general terms. I hope I
didn't confuse matters. Sorry, if I did.


--
___________________________
Bonnie Granat
Granat Editorial Services
http://www.editors-writers.info
Fast | Accurate | Affordable

 

[jake]

Hi guys,

Could you please check out < http://x01.co.uk/frontend/ > and tell me what
you think? Contrary to what the site says, it's not actually "launched"
yet, it's just text for testing purposes. There's two "articles" up there
that I have written and a friend of mine is going to write some stuff for
it, too. The code validates and so does the CSS, it works in every browser
I've tried and is even readable in all but the "show images and links only"
mode in Opera. I reckon that the site's going to be aimed at web developers
anyway, so most people are going to be viewing with a more modern browser,
but it still has to be "good".

Just looking for nitpicks, really. Do your worst (oh, but be gentle,
please)! *hides* )

Nice looking site.

Looks OK at the moment, but a better test will be when the site is
'fully loaded'.

'Looking' at it in a voice browser, the only comments I would make are:

(a) to re-emphasize what a number of people have been saying about using
correct mark-up to show the headings. People using screen-readers or
voice browsers use the structure of the page for navigation.

At the moment, if I want to move through a page via the headings, my
browser will tell me 'No heading on this page' and I know that that's
not going to be possible.

(b) Use the <Title> on each page to confirm to users that they're on
the right page e.g. <title>X01 - Scrapbook</title>

(c) The ability to bypass the reading of the navigation would be nice --
although it's not too much of a problem at present (just annoying for
'repeat visitors') as the menu is fairly short.

(However, If the page was 'structured', I would know that the first <h2>
on a page was the start of the main content. e.g. <h2>Latest News</h2>
and could use the reader/browsers facilities to go directly there.)

Otherwise, it sounds OK (except for one or two instances where -- due to
lack of suitable punctuation -- some lines 'run together').

regards.

 

[jake]

http://bobby.watchfire.com:80/bobby/html/en/gls/g35.html
which explains why links should be seperated with more than whitespace.

"...........Separate adjacent links with more than whitespace.
Place some sort of separating character between adjacent links. Images
or bulleted or numberd lists are good choices. You can also use explicit
separator characters such as "|" or enclose the links in brackets [].
"Whitespace characters", such as spaces, line l. breaks, carriage
returns, and paragraph breaks, are not sufficient. For example:

[<A HREF="jim.html">Jim's Home Page</A>] [<A HREF="alice.html">Alice's
Home Page</A>] ................."

But don't do what this example shows. Use '|' by all means, but don't
enclose the items in [brackets] ......... not unless you want to hear
the reader droning on about 'close left bracket' 'open right bracket'
throughout the menu ;-)

regards.

 

[jake]

Ref: < http://x01.co.uk/frontend/ >

if you use italics, use <em> instead of <i>.

Clearly, the use of italics on the X01 page shows a requirement for a
CSS-styled <h3>.

However, in cases where italics are not used to 'emphasize' words --
use of 'foreign' words in English text-- isn't <i></i> quite acceptable?
What do you think?

regards.

 

[kchayka]

You find the content of what is going to be a web development mini-zine
boring, yet you're on a web development group - I'm just wondering over the
logic, there...

Well, that's what you get for cross-posting and not setting a follow-up.

FYI, Bonnie is a regular in a.h.critique, but not alt.html. Her
particular expertise is in technical writing and editing, which are
pretty darned good skills to have for developing page content, and
pretty darned suitable skills for a.h.critique, methinks.

Something to keep in mind next time you decide to cross-post...

 

[Toby A Inkster]

It's always possible.

Consider you are stuck writing a list on an idiot CMS that filters out all
HTML tags except some specific ones like <a>, <b>, <i> and <br>. (Yes,
such things do exist).

 

[Toby A Inkster]

However, in cases where italics are not used to 'emphasize' words --
use of 'foreign' words in English text-- isn't <i></i> quite acceptable?
What do you think?

I would say:

Using the <code>&lt;i&gt;</code> tag may not be right thing to do, but it
is the <span lang="la">status quo</span>.

span[lang] {
font-style: italic;
}

Why? Because this adds semantics to the document whereas <i> adds only
presentation.

 

[jake]

However, in cases where italics are not used to 'emphasize' words --
use of 'foreign' words in English text-- isn't <i></i> quite acceptable?
What do you think?

I would say:

Using the <code>&lt;i&gt;</code> tag may not be right thing to do, but it
is the <span lang="la">status quo</span>.

span[lang] {
font-style: italic;
}

Why? Because this adds semantics to the document whereas <i> adds only
presentation.

OK, agreed; the lang="la" will tell the browser to use a Latin
pronunciation ....... but what about 'e.g.' and 'i.e.' ? Just
presentation?

Try this one:
What about the name of a ship ...... where the ship's name is in English
;-)

regards.

 

[Leif K-Brooks]

What about the name of a ship ...... where the ship's name is in English
;-)

<span class="ship">Ship name here</span>


..ship {
font-style : italic;
}

 

[picayunish]

Without quill or qualm, Andrew Cameron quothed:

An IP address of the culprit (and like those can't be faked) isn't going
to help me much when my mailbox is full and my bandwidth limit is used
up. Form validation is useless other than checking that the domain they
have entered for their email actually exists. I suppose I could only
allow one click of the form per IP address, but then some people use a
proxy so I have an entire ISP or twenty all with the same IP. I could
limit it on the email address but it's so easy to just make up more
email addresses. I've never loved form mail, simply because it invites
abuse.

You can make a fake header so that the spam filter doesn't reconized as a
spam message.
Perhaps you can tested with the example header which I use for my formmail.
http://members.chello.nl/e.vandervaart/note.html#fake
--
Edwin van der Vaart (Geen familie van....)
http://www.semi-conductors.nl/ PHP Redirect to semi-conductor.nl
http://www.semi-conductor.nl/ Links to Semiconductors sites
http://members.chello.nl/e.vandervaart/ Experimental site
http://host.deluxnetwork.com/~evdvaart/ Experimental PHP site