design question - what makes a page of options clear for the user?

I

Isofarro

lawrence said:
I appreciate the feedback, but surely there are a lot of designers out
there who use Dreamweaver or Frontpage exclusively?

Pity. Using Dreamweaver or Frontpage in conjunction to a brain would
certainly improve matters. Its like a toggle switch. Turn on Dreamweaver,
turn off brain.
Anyway, we are under a very tight deadline, so there may not be time
for the person in question to learn a new set of skills.

So that's your excuse for using:

<div class="bigRedSpottyHeader">News</div>

instead of

<h1>News</h1>

Interesting argument.
 
I

Isofarro

lawrence said:
She wrote me back: "Yes... and what is the good reason? the structure
is obviously not nonexistant - the japge renders."

Rendering in one browser with a certain configuration is only one tiny step
on the world wide web.
I think that about sums up my view. XML has semantics, HTML doesn't.

Semantics isn't structure.
When dealing with HTML, as long as the page renders across all
platforms (we test IE and Netscape on PCs and Macs, and Netscape on
Linux) then that seems to be good enough, yes?

Hardly. What do you consider "Netscape" as being? I see there's no speech
based browser, no text-browser, no search engine spider, no khtml based
browser, probably no thought of Mozilla, no Opera, no Dillo, no iCab. Platforms - no
PocketPC, no WinCE, no Lineo devices, no Risc based systems, no set-top
boxes, no mobile-phone technology.
 
L

lawrence

She wrote me back: "Yes... and what is the good reason? the structure
is obviously not nonexistant - the japge renders."

I think that about sums up my view. XML has semantics, HTML doesn't.
When dealing with HTML, as long as the page renders across all
platforms (we test IE and Netscape on PCs and Macs, and Netscape on
Linux) then that seems to be good enough, yes?


I appreciate all the reponses and I'll forward them. As to supporting
PDA's and set-top boxes and such, we're working on some code that will
output a XHTML 1.1 valid print-friendly version of each page.

Does anyone have anything, positive or negative, to say about the
clarity of either design, or to point to admin or options pages or
control panels on the web that you think are good examples of clarity?

Has anyone here used TypePad and if so would you like to share your
reactions to it? Did you think it was clear?
 
L

lawrence

Mark Parnell said:
Sometime around 13 Oct 2003 20:58:02 -0700, lawrence is reported to have
stated:


No, that's *deezyners*. ;-) But you are missing the point. The tool is
irrelevant (to a large extent, anyway). It is the ability of the user that
matters. Someone who knows what they are doing can make a better site in
Notepad than someone who doesn't know what they are doing who happens to be
using DW, and vice-versa.


What do you expect, in alt.html? :)


That's reasonable, of course. Could you recommend a good design forum?
I searched groups on google and found none with the word "design" in
it. Do you yourself have a favorite design site? We've all (in-house)
been studying Edward Tufte a lot, and www.edwardtufte.com is good, but
it is a general design site, and not focused on web-design issues.
Christina Wodtke is also very good, but again, not focused on visual
design.
 
L

lawrence

Isofarro said:
Pity. Using Dreamweaver or Frontpage in conjunction to a brain would
certainly improve matters. Its like a toggle switch. Turn on Dreamweaver,
turn off brain.

But surely you can't mean that? Look around the web and you see a lot
of excellent work being done in Dreamweaver and Frontpage. I have the
impression, from talking with people at the local tech society, that
the majority of designers use one of these tools.

Writing a sentence like "Turn on Dreamweaver, turn off brain" reduces
your comment to the level of a troll looking to start a flamewar. I
assume you're more intelligent than that.
 
L

lawrence

Isofarro said:
Hardly. What do you consider "Netscape" as being? I see there's no speech
based browser, no text-browser, no search engine spider, no khtml based
browser, probably no thought of Mozilla, no Opera, no Dillo, no iCab. Platforms - no
PocketPC, no WinCE, no Lineo devices, no Risc based systems, no set-top
boxes, no mobile-phone technology.

I don't know the answer to your questions, but doesn't Dreamweaver
take care of a certain amount of this? I'm not going to tell my
co-workers that they have to start hand-coding so we can support
WinCE. It seems like these are the sort of issues that Dreamweaver and
Frontpage are supposed to protect a designer from.
 
L

lawrence

Isofarro said:
Rendering in one browser with a certain configuration is only one tiny step
on the world wide web.


Semantics isn't structure.

One thing I get from this whole discussion is that it is important to
use heading tags for the headings, because Google will look at those.
But how can Google evaluate <li> or <ul>? Even <blockquote> is
meaningless if it doesn't come with a linked citation. As near as I
know, you can't link a citation, or an url, to a blockquote in HTML,
though you could do so in XML. I suppose you could go:

<blockquote name="we_hold_certain_truths_to_be_self_evi"
value="http://www.declarationOfIndependence.org">

And then write some software to parse that. That might be interesting
to do.

But basically, what I'm saying is, other than heading tags, which the
search engines can use, I don't see that the other tags give enough
information that one can parse them in some meaningful way.

Drifting off the subject a bit, as we have been for several posts, my
basic resistance to using something like <li> in the navigation bar is
that it seems to make an assumption of a homogenous list of links,
when in fact we've designed our software to make it easy for people to
put anything they want into the nav bars. We feel this is one of our
basic strengths compared to MoveableType.
 
M

Mark Parnell

Sometime around 14 Oct 2003 14:15:54 -0700, lawrence is reported to have
stated:
That's reasonable, of course. Could you recommend a good design forum?

news:comp.infosystems.www.authoring.site-design (though you will find many
of the regulars from alt.html there as well) or perhaps
(don't subscribe there myself so
can't comment on the quality :) )
 
I

Isofarro

lawrence said:
But surely you can't mean that?

What portion of these designers you talk about have a website that validates
and contains properly structured HTML? Go on, have a look. Now, when you
find out the vast majority of them have websites that don't validate and
have no sensible structure - then you need to ask yourself why that is that
these pages are not valid and not well structured. Is it the tool, or the
web designer that is causing the problem?

"Well that's what Dreamweaver / Frontpage generates" is a symptomatic excuse
that the tool is switched on, and the brain is switched off. Web designers
create websites, they use tools to do so - that can only really be done
well with the brain engaged. So markup that is broken coming out the tool
chosen for the job is fixed in one of two ways:

* Fix it by hand (requires a brain and knowledge of HTML - no problem for
someone developing websites)
* Use a tool that isn't broken.

Look around the web and you see a lot
of excellent work being done in Dreamweaver and Frontpage.

I see 0.7% of pages on the web that actually validate. Looking for websites
that are properly structured in this is needle and haystack time. How many
of these 0.7% of sites are done by webdesigners exclusively relying on
Frontpage or Dreamweaver? How many websites in the 99.3% of websites are
created using Frontpage and Dreamweaver? You will find the vast majority of
professional web designers in the 99.3% "haven't got the basics right"
category.

I have the
impression, from talking with people at the local tech society, that
the majority of designers use one of these tools.

Numbers does not equate to a compelling argument. Sheep mentality is a known
disorder on the web. Rather evaluate the tools on merit and the ability to
aid you in getting the job done properly.
 
I

Isofarro

lawrence said:
I don't know the answer to your questions,

Open up this browser you consider as being "Netscape". Click on "Help" in
the browser menu, then click "About..." (or something similar). Therein it
will mention the actual browser version you are using. Now copy and paste
that browser version into a reply to this post. That will sort question
number 1.
but doesn't Dreamweaver
take care of a certain amount of this?

Not according to the websites out there that are supposedly created in
Dreamweaver.

I'm not going to tell my
co-workers that they have to start hand-coding so we can support
WinCE.


To support WinCE based browsers requires you to add nothing into your pages.
To stop your website being usable on a WinCE device just use a tool and
don't bother learning about the medium you are working in (It worked for
everyone else).
It seems like these are the sort of issues that Dreamweaver and
Frontpage are supposed to protect a designer from.

Hardly. A good webdesigner uses his knowledge of HTML and his knowledge of
the Web to produce websites that work in a large variety of circumstances.
A software tool cannot help you here. Dreamweaver is like a hammer. It can
put a nail into a wall, but its no good at telling you you've just hammered
it into the wrong place.
 
I

Isofarro

lawrence said:
One thing I get from this whole discussion is that it is important to
use heading tags for the headings, because Google will look at those.
But how can Google evaluate <li> or <ul>?

Items in lists are related. Otherwise they wouldn't be listed together. Now
have a look at http://labs.google.com/ and look at Google Sets.
Even <blockquote> is
meaningless if it doesn't come with a linked citation.

http://www.diveintomark.com/ uses cite and quote as the basis of a citation
search.
As near as I
know, you can't link a citation,

Fragments of markup can be (and are) extracted and displayed as part of a
list of results. (Properly structured HTML fragments).
But basically, what I'm saying is, other than heading tags, which the
search engines can use, I don't see that the other tags give enough
information that one can parse them in some meaningful way.

So your knowledge is limited, damn the rest of us? Nice.
Drifting off the subject a bit, as we have been for several posts, my
basic resistance to using something like <li> in the navigation bar is
that it seems to make an assumption of a homogenous list of links,

You claim it is not a list? Then what is it?
when in fact we've designed our software to make it easy for people to
put anything they want into the nav bars. We feel this is one of our
basic strengths compared to MoveableType.

No. MoveableType is written by a team (Ben and Mena Trott, plus Anil Dash)
that truely grok the web. They grok the fundamental concepts of structure,
community and interoperability - the essence of the web. Its no big
surprise that the most influential people on the web use MoveableType as
their blog software (apart from the guys who roll their own blogs).
 
M

Mark Parnell

Sometime around Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:29:12 +0000, Isofarro is reported to
have stated:
A software tool cannot help you here. Dreamweaver is like a hammer. It can
put a nail into a wall, but its no good at telling you you've just hammered
it into the wrong place.

LOL - I like that analogy. :)
 
L

lawrence

I realize now how right you are when it comes to making final choices
about how a web page should be designed. Suppose something is the
banner for the page. It is the most important thing on the page. Then
it should be in an <h1> header. Something is a subheader. Then it
should be in an <h2> or <h3>. There is a list of options - no need for
it not to be in <ul>.

I get that now. You are all designers, and this is the way you think.
I started off thinking you were idiots, but now I realize that the job
of a designer is to make decisions just like this - the intelligent
discernment of what information has weight. In web design, one has to
make those discernments, then back them with the right kind of tag.
You are all in the business of final-output decisions.

Since the designers working on our control panels are working on final
designs, they should be making those kind of final-output decisions. I
only now realize they extent are still coding in the old style.

My perspective is different from the perspective of a designer because
mostly I program. We work to have a system that a graphic designer can
customize. I take out hard codings where I can, but much remain. It is
a shame, but it is a convenience, and for a small shop, convenience is
a powerful incentive. Not just for us, but for every small design shop
in the world that might use our product. Our goal has always been to
come up with a set of tools that would work well inside of
Dreamweaver, and anyone using Dreamweaver is going to put a premium on
convenience, or otherwise they would not be using Dreamweaver.

I use div tags for everything because it offers neutrality. It would
be wrong if I made final-output decisions and hardcoded that into the
software. What if I thought the web page headline was more important
than an entry headline but then some graphic designer wanted to do a
design that went flatly against my assumption. I fear someday seeing a
style sheet like this:


h1.webpageHeadline{
visibility:hidden;
line-height:0px;
}

h4.entrySubheading{
font-size: 120px;
font-weight: bold;
}


Here is a site that is being designed so that the entries are
important and the page title has been made invisible. In fact, my own
personal website is designed like this. But would Google understand
this? Would Google understand that on this website, the empty <h1> has
no importance, and the <h4> tag should be treated as if it was h1?

Rather than guess wrong, when I have to hardcode some code, I prefer
to put everything into div tags. They offer a neutrality of judgement.
 
L

lawrence

Isofarro said:
You claim it is not a list? Then what is it?

It is whatever the user puts there. Maybe an image. Maybe some text
about themselves. Maybe a political quote they like. Maybe some PHP
code that does stuff I can't imagine. The thing is, I can't know ahead
of time what they are going to put there.
 
L

lawrence

Isofarro said:
I see 0.7% of pages on the web that actually validate. Looking for websites
that are properly structured in this is needle and haystack time. How many
of these 0.7% of sites are done by webdesigners exclusively relying on
Frontpage or Dreamweaver? How many websites in the 99.3% of websites are
created using Frontpage and Dreamweaver? You will find the vast majority of
professional web designers in the 99.3% "haven't got the basics right"
category.

This discussion is sadly degenerating into a flame war. To my mind
your statistics betray your argument. The web is a vibrant place. If
it can be so vibrant despite the fact 99.3% of the pages are done
wrong, then the "standards" defining validation are meaningless.
However, I don't wish to engage in what might turn out to be a long
and fruitless discussion, so I will leave the final word on the matter
to you.
 
T

Toby A Inkster

lawrence said:
This discussion is sadly degenerating into a flame war. To my mind
your statistics betray your argument. The web is a vibrant place. If
it can be so vibrant despite the fact 99.3% of the pages are done
wrong, then the "standards" defining validation are meaningless.

No -- things happen to work because pages are close enough to the
standards for browsers to guess what the authors meant.

If it weren't for the standards, then this wouldn't be the case.
 
I

Isofarro

lawrence said:
It is whatever the user puts there. Maybe an image.

Collections of images linking to pages - still a list of links
Maybe some text
about themselves.

Collections of text linking to pages - still a list of links.
Maybe a political quote they like.

You are using a political quote as a form of navigation? Nuts.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,085
Messages
2,570,597
Members
47,220
Latest member
AugustinaJ

Latest Threads

Top