comments and constructive criticism wanted

"steven" <stevenPANTSvh (AT) pandora (DOT) be> wrote

Same for javascript. BTW, I don't understand the hysterics javascript
seems
to cause.

Some folks do get overwrought over these things. But seriously, most of the
time Javascript is used for stuff that could be handled perfectly well
without Javascript. In those cases, it's usually used because (a) the writer
didn't *know* a non-Javascript way to do it, or (b) because the effect is a
bit cooler. But the coolness is at the expense of the number of people who
won't be able to use the page. A substantial amount of consideration of the
alternatives and a cost/benefit analysis should precede the design of a page
that requires Javascript to function.

"steven" <stevenPANTSvh (AT) pandora (DOT) be> wrote:

Oh dear! The calendar is written in Javascript, but you don't seem to
have Javascript enabled in your browser.

1) Don't you think I know that? This message is also displayed when js
*is* available, not smart.

Well, I thought it would be useful to know *why* there's no calendar. Note
that I don't tell the user to enable javascript.
With js enabled, do you mean the message is still visible when the calendar
has been written?

It's visible when the page loads, placing an appropriate message in a
noscript element will prevent that.

2) It breaks when zooming text.

Can you be more specific? Screenshot? I think It behaves quite well when I
zoom in twice in FF 1. Doesn't every design break down if you zoom too much?

Content overflowing is fine, content overlapping is not ok, that's a
broken design.

4) Microfonts

That's what Barbara also said. Which text is too small?

All text is substantially smaller than what I can read comfortably. Any
attempt to reduce the size of the main body font will result in
uncomfortable or unreadable text for some users, leave it alone, or
specify 100%.

6) Inline css, externalize it

Is it OK to use internal stylesheets?

Rarely, certainly not the way you use it.

7) Incorrect usage of definition lists

OK, I'll check with w3schools.

Check the W3*C* specifications for information on element usage,
w3schools has nothing to do with w3c, w3schools tutorials are not
reliable learning material.

8) &nbsp; use css margins or padding instead

Fixed.
I thought it would be rather expensive, but it's OK.

I missed the actual problem; a link to the page itself (shouldn't be
there), and a non working "time" link who's function I can't understand
(therefore it's not possible to suggest correct markup).

10) Incorrect alt content on images

From w3schools: ' The "alt" attribute tells the reader what he or she is
missing on a page if the browser can't load images. The browser will then
display the alternate text instead of the image. '
Isn't that how I used it?

alt="note" is not appropriate on the "note" image, it doesn't perform
it's function. First you should address the issue of structural and
semantic markup (structure is required here), then you should probably
insert a "Note:" prefix, you could then add some decoration by using the
"note" image.

Btw, no need to float the "note" image, the img element is inline.

11) Inappropriate usage of the title attribute on images

Again from w3schools:

If you use the alt attribute in Firefox on images and image maps
the text will not show on mouse-over as in other browsers.
Firefox uses the alt attribute the way it's meant to be used, like an
alternative text if the image won't load, not as a mouse-over text.

Firefox does support mouse-over comments on images or image maps if you use
a title attribute in the <img> tag.

E.g. <img src="image.gif" alt="bla" title="bla bla bla"

The title attribute should normally be omitted unless providing extra
information is useful.

--
Spartanicus

steven wrote:

Same for javascript. BTW, I don't understand the hysterics
javascript seems to cause.

There is currently a wad of Usenet postings inviting you to visit a
link (a comcast.net page) to see a Santa Claus picture. If you are an
IE user, with JavaScript ON, you will immediately become infected with
an as-yet unpatched Windows exploit. Those using modern browsers are
unaffected.

<http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/bloodhound.exploit.21.html>

We all know you'll burn in hell if you use frames, but if you use
javascript your punishment will be even worse, like getting a Neil
Diamond CD :-)

Hmm, I rather like Neil Diamond...

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:54:52 GMT, steven wrote:

http://www.nenya.be/41229-1/cal.htm

see http://www.alistapart.com/topics/css/
--
Groet,
Adriana
,---- [hint]

throw rubbish out if you want to reach me by e-mail
'----

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 12:37:56 GMT, "steven" <stevenPANTSvh (AT) pandora (DOT) be>
wrote:

[...]

OK, I'll check with w3schools.

Please don't, at least not as a source of "authority".

You "shall" check specifications as originally given from W3C and then
if you need additional hints and tips, look through the meta-FAQ for
this NG for links to sites where you stand a chance to find decent "tips
and tricks" for how to make CSS "work" for your users in reality.

This following site is my favorite but you may find others good enough
for you, still I would not personally put w3schools anywhere near the
top of the list. w3schools are not in any way affiliated with W3C,
despite their "deceiving" name.

<http://www.westciv.com/style_master/house/tutorials/index.html>

From w3schools: ' The "alt" attribute tells the reader what he or she is
missing on a page if the browser can't load images...

That's plain "BS" if you ask me :-)

--
Rex

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 11:50:35 GMT, "steven" <stevenPANTSvh (AT) pandora (DOT) be>
wrote:

"Barbara de Zoete" <b_de_zoete (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote in message
newspsjti7nwrx5vgts (AT) zoete_b (DOT) ..

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:54:52 GMT, steven <stevenPANTSvh (AT) pandora (DOT) be> wrote:
http://www.nenya.be/41229-1/cal.htm

Read back for about a week of posts in this group and in alt.html,
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html,

I was hoping for some more concrete comments. Re-reading a week of posts
could take another week. :-(

Well, whenever you can find the time to study a bit of history on this
subject yo will be amazed over the vast amount of ground that has
already been covered. Some of us who has been here in this NG for a
considerable number of years already are easily tired of repeating what
has already been taken care of :-)

fix the obvious mistakes in your
design (fixed width, javascript dependent, microfonts et cetera)...

mistakes? Fixed width is not an error, nor is it illegal. It's a *choice*.

It is most always a bad choice never the less.

[...]

Same for javascript. BTW, I don't understand the hysterics javascript seems
to cause.

It's just about always a question of security and you have already been
given another message here in this thread that informs you about a
possible consequence of having JS enabled, at least in a browser from
the "Big Company".

I have several times in my life, when I have had reason to work for
steel producing companies around the world, found that server admin's in
big organizations do filter out JS content from www pages before they
are allowed to enter the company intranet.

Effectively that means that even a "nice" JS page will appear as
"useless" on such an intranet if JS is used on the page for some
important functions. And that is all for security reasons.

What's the problem with the font? On my Win2K system it's the same
size as standard Windows text like menus.

Nothing really; the usual discussions about "micro fonts" stems from a
situation where the page author has specified font sizes in px units.
Doing that means that IE stops to respect a users intent to change the
font size to something more suitable for her/him.

I can not see that your page suffers from that syndrome, not in any one
of my browsers at least (IE6 included), except for the fact that the
initial view comes out too small. But for as long as I can reset it to
my liking it's Ok for me.

--
Rex

steven wrote:

What's the problem with the font? On my Win2K system it's the same size as
standard Windows text like menus.

http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/d...ize.html#qhead
--
"The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing,
but to us who are being saved, it is the power of God."
1 Corinthians 1:18 NIV

Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/