Critique Please

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:23:58 -0400, Brandons of mass destruction
<junkie46 (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote:

Ah, perhaps I should be more clear. We're well aware there is no
content. This is just the site design itself. Content will be added
later.

Ok, it's a design mockup. Still, very slow to load. Less reliance on
images would be better.

And for a small town, how many blind people actually surf the web?

Enough.

I'm not saying that blind people should be ignore completely, but
clearly, IMO, dealing with the majority of the populace is the first
goal, yes?

I'd argue with that. I think the primary goal is to deal with the
presentation of the content in a way any browsing situation can
understand, then dress it up pretty in ways that won't ruin it for
non-graphical environments.

Is this Savannah, GA? Not so small in that case. Plus, it's hopefully
going to draw people to town too. Your market is more than the locals.

If you can reduce the page weight (= wait) and perhaps change some
image-as-text instances to styled text, and add meaningful ALT images to
all remaining images (and if it's purely presentational and not vital to
the content, use alt="" - or better yet, include as a background-image in
CSS), this template will be much better.

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:24:41 -0400, Brandons of mass destruction
<junkie46 (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote:

In article <9Awfc.11489$k05.7248 (AT) newsread2 (DOT) news.pas.earthlink.net>,
m <NOXwebmasterx (AT) xmbstevensx (DOT) com> wrote:

Brandons of mass destruction wrote:

Here's a site our web designers are working on

http://216.55.165.48/~connect/

Thoughts?


Loads into lynx in 3 seconds.

How many webusers, especially in a small town, actually use linux?

Heh. If you're designing this just for your town, put it on a CD-ROM and
have it available at the library.

You're not on the Town-Wide-Web.

In article <opr6h5hzd6dvhyks (AT) news (DOT) rcn.com>, Neal <neal413 (AT) spamrcn (DOT) com>
wrote:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:24:41 -0400, Brandons of mass destruction
junkie46 (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote:

In article <9Awfc.11489$k05.7248 (AT) newsread2 (DOT) news.pas.earthlink.net>,
m <NOXwebmasterx (AT) xmbstevensx (DOT) com> wrote:

Brandons of mass destruction wrote:

Here's a site our web designers are working on

http://216.55.165.48/~connect/

Thoughts?


Loads into lynx in 3 seconds.

How many webusers, especially in a small town, actually use linux?



Heh. If you're designing this just for your town, put it on a CD-ROM and
have it available at the library.

You're not on the Town-Wide-Web.

We understand that, but our target audience is clearly this town, a
small town and doesn't have a lot of people using Lynx, that it
shouldn't be a major concern, right?

--
Quarkxpress sucks.

In article <pYwfc.361$c33.293 (AT) newsfe2-gui (DOT) server.ntli.net>,
"Andrew Urquhart" <reply (AT) website (DOT) in.sig> wrote:

Brandons of mass destruction wrote:
NOXwebmasterx (AT) xmbstevensx (DOT) com> wrote:
Brandons of mass destruction wrote:
Here's a site our web designers are working on
http://216.55.165.48/~connect/
Thoughts?

Loads into lynx in 3 seconds.

How many webusers, especially in a small town, actually use linux?

404 - Clue Not Found

heh. you sound like my wife.

I meant Lynx, instead of Linux, but the point is still a good one, i
think. If only a small percentage of the population is using lynx, then
clearly it isn't a major concern, particularly when you have limited
resources.

--
Quarkxpress sucks.

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:43:53 -0400, Brandons of mass destruction
<junkie46 (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote:

You're not on the Town-Wide-Web.

We understand that, but our target audience is clearly this town, a
small town and doesn't have a lot of people using Lynx, that it
shouldn't be a major concern, right?

If laws in Europe make their way here, no more major concern than since so
few people in your town use wheelchairs, ramps to enter town offices
aren't a major concern.

Even without legislation, you should plan for the future - and who knows
what browsers people will be using in the future? For certain, they will
be more conforming to W3C standards, and more easily designed for by
designing for the standard, not the browser.

Brandons of mass destruction wrote:

If only a small percentage of the population is using lynx, then
clearly it isn't a major concern, particularly when you have limited
resources.

I didn't know a website that is accessible by everyone
needed more resources than one that isn't.

--
Els

Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:46:05 -0400, Brandons of mass destruction
<junkie46 (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote:

If only a small percentage of the population is using lynx, then
clearly it isn't a major concern, particularly when you have limited
resources.

If doesn't require more resources. It simply requires a paradigm of design
which is primarily standards-based, not browser-based. Yes, quirks of
various browsers enter into it. Still, it's not much extra work to please
everybody.

In article <opr6h54kpkdvhyks (AT) news (DOT) rcn.com>, Neal <neal413 (AT) spamrcn (DOT) com>
wrote:

Even without legislation, you should plan for the future - and who knows
what browsers people will be using in the future? For certain, they will
be more conforming to W3C standards, and more easily designed for by
designing for the standard, not the browser.

how do you know that browsers will be more conforming to w3C standards?
That's not in Microsoft's interests.

--
Quarkxpress sucks.

In article <407ea143$0$41757$5fc3050 (AT) dreader2 (DOT) news.tiscali.nl>,
Els <els.aNOSPAM (AT) tiscali (DOT) nl> wrote:

Brandons of mass destruction wrote:

If only a small percentage of the population is using lynx, then
clearly it isn't a major concern, particularly when you have limited
resources.

I didn't know a website that is accessible by everyone
needed more resources than one that isn't.

More resources to build in that accessibility.

--
Quarkxpress sucks.

Brandons of mass destruction wrote:

Loads into lynx in 3 seconds.

How many webusers, especially in a small town, actually use lynx?

I think you misunderstand the reason for my posting the linx output.
It was to *demonstrate* that there is no useful information
on the page that is not an image. Try Googling 'accessibility'.
--
cheers, el m