Work In progress - critique please?

(I hope I'm in the right forum)
Work in progress:
http://www.cb-design.net

I want to have an image on the main section of the page that changes as I
roll over the menu buttons. I was somewhere how to do it, maybe a year ago,
now that I want to use it, I can't figure it out.

I'm still tinkering with the text content, graphics/pictures layout will
come after I have the text done (to a certain point).
The more I look at it, the more I think the grays are too light if I'm going
to use yellow text. I think I need to go darker.

Ideas, suggestions, comments, Please?

Thanks
-DaKitty

"DaKitty" <Imgonna.com (AT) something (DOT) net> wrote

(I hope I'm in the right forum)
Work in progress:
http://www.cb-design.net

I want to have an image on the main section of the page that changes as I
roll over the menu buttons. I was somewhere how to do it, maybe a year
ago,
now that I want to use it, I can't figure it out.

I'm still tinkering with the text content, graphics/pictures layout will
come after I have the text done (to a certain point).
The more I look at it, the more I think the grays are too light if I'm
going
to use yellow text. I think I need to go darker.

Ideas, suggestions, comments, Please?

Tables for layout (unnecessary).

A *huge* amount of javascript to do the rollovers where a couple of lines of
CSS would do.

Pictures of text. Not nice to blind/partially sighted people or search
engines.

Mailto does not work.

That yellow on grey gets tiring after a while.

Cheers
Richard.

"rf" <making.it.up (AT) the (DOT) time> wrote

"DaKitty" <Imgonna.com (AT) something (DOT) net> wrote in message
news:y0vOa.91480$Pc5.81702 (AT) fed1read01 (DOT) ..
(I hope I'm in the right forum)
Work in progress:
http://www.cb-design.net

[snip]
Pictures of text. Not nice to blind/partially sighted people or search
engines.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with "pictures of text"
....but if "pictures of text" are being used for navigation, an alternative
text-based nav system should be provided

--
W

"West" <not (AT) this (DOT) one> wrote

"rf" <making.it.up (AT) the (DOT) time> wrote in message
news:FTwOa.391$TX6.3961 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au...

"DaKitty" <Imgonna.com (AT) something (DOT) net> wrote in message
news:y0vOa.91480$Pc5.81702 (AT) fed1read01 (DOT) ..
(I hope I'm in the right forum)
Work in progress:
http://www.cb-design.net

[snip]
Pictures of text. Not nice to blind/partially sighted people or search
engines.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with "pictures of text"

There is a *lot* wrong with pictures of text.

The text is not resisable in many browsers (including the most used one).
This is an accessibility problem for partially sighted people.

The text is invisible to blind people who use aural browsers or screen
readers.

Most importantly the text is invisible to search engine spiders.

Of lesser importance but still an issue - a picture of some text is
invariably orders of magnitude bigger than the raw text it replaces.

Pictures of text is fine for a logo where the font will usually not be
installed on the viewers system and may even be a hand crafted graphic. For
content however, no.

Cheers
Richard.

"rf" <making.it.up (AT) the (DOT) time> wrote

"West" <not (AT) this (DOT) one> wrote in message
news:xlxOa.21967$pK2.33334 (AT) news (DOT) indigo.ie...


"rf" <making.it.up (AT) the (DOT) time> wrote in message
news:FTwOa.391$TX6.3961 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au...

"DaKitty" <Imgonna.com (AT) something (DOT) net> wrote in message
news:y0vOa.91480$Pc5.81702 (AT) fed1read01 (DOT) ..
(I hope I'm in the right forum)
Work in progress:
http://www.cb-design.net

[snip]
Pictures of text. Not nice to blind/partially sighted people or search
engines.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with "pictures of text"

There is a *lot* wrong with pictures of text.

Your browser, as well as probably every programme you use has icons?
What's on most of those icons -- pictures of text?
Yes, a small number of apps allow for resizing of icons, but only one
alternative!

You choose to snip the important part of my post --
"...but if "pictures of text" are being used for navigation, an alternative
text-based nav system should be provided"

The text is not resisable in many browsers (including the most used one).
This is an accessibility problem for partially sighted people.

The text is invisible to blind people who use aural browsers or screen
readers.

Most importantly the text is invisible to search engine spiders.

Of lesser importance but still an issue - a picture of some text is
invariably orders of magnitude bigger than the raw text it replaces.

Pictures of text is fine for a logo where the font will usually not be
installed on the viewers system and may even be a hand crafted graphic.
For
content however, no.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with "pictures of text"

--
W

"DaKitty" <Imgonna.com (AT) something (DOT) net> wrote:

http://www.cb-design.net

The raster lines and colors are making my eyes bleed.

STOP the paaaiiin! Make it sttttoooppppp!!!!

--
Farlo
Urban Fey Dragon
"Imperial" States of America
(The Land of Confusion)

"rf" <making.it.up (AT) the (DOT) time> wrote

"West" <not (AT) this (DOT) one> wrote in message
news:u2yOa.21973$pK2.33483 (AT) news (DOT) indigo.ie...
"rf" <making.it.up (AT) the (DOT) time> wrote in message
news:mBxOa.441$TX6.6518 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au...


There is nothing intrinsically wrong with "pictures of text"

There is a *lot* wrong with pictures of text.

Your browser, as well as probably every programme you use has icons?

Yes. It also has a pull down textual menu system as an alternative to the
sometimes ambiguious pictures. As do all the programs I write for a
living.

What's on most of those icons -- pictures of text?

Nope. There is a little picture of something like, say, a printer.
Underneath this (if I so choose) is the text "Print". Yes, real text, not
a
picture of text but real text, output to the screen with the Windows API
function TextOut(x,y,_T("Print")); Note the "text" part of that API
function. This is real text, readable by a screen reader. I can even
resize
it as part of the setup for my GUI interface. I can make it as small or as
big as I need. One can not do this with pictures of text.

Yes, a small number of apps allow for resizing of icons, but only one
alternative!

?

Several apps allow you to choose large or small icons, as I'm sure you know

What do icons have to do with this argument?

who's arguing?

Icons are not text.

Icons are pictures, and often contain text!


[snip etc etc]

<ot>

Attended a gig 2 nights ago in a venue just across the road from me by
brilliant Australian guitarist Bruce Mathiske (
http://www.mathiske.com.au/home/ )
and another Australian guitar genius will be in the same venue on the 5th
August, Tommy Emmanuel ( http://www.tommyemmanuel.com )

</ot>

--
W

"rf"

[...]

http://www.mathiske.com.au/home/ )

Yep. Know him well. We go up to Newcastle often for the jazz in the vines
festival. He is always there. One very very fine guitarist. Makes the
instrument sound like there are three people playing it. Have a couple of
his CDs. What on earth is he doing over there? :-)

He tours Ireland regularly, but this was only my second time to see him.

and another Australian guitar genius will be in the same venue on the
5th
August, Tommy Emmanuel ( http://www.tommyemmanuel.com )

Don't know him that well but have heard him on the wireless.

Tommy tours here a lot as well. He said Bruce used to be a pupil of his.
Bruce denies this and told me he just picked up a few tips on how to play
Chet Atkins style from Tommy! ...ask Bruce next time you see him !
Tommy played at the closing of the Sydney Olympics but resides in England
now. Two professional guitarist friends of mine attended six of his gigs
when he was here last November!!!

--
W

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 11:06:58 +0000, rf wrote:

There is a *lot* wrong with pictures of text.

The text is not resisable in many browsers (including the most used one).
This is an accessibility problem for partially sighted people.

The text is invisible to blind people who use aural browsers or screen
readers.

Most importantly the text is invisible to search engine spiders.

Of lesser importance but still an issue - a picture of some text is
invariably orders of magnitude bigger than the raw text it replaces.

And don't forget:

- increase load times;

- doesn't allow the user to copy and paste.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS | mailto:tobyink (AT) goddamn (DOT) co.uk | pgp:0x6A2A7D39
aim:inka80 | icq:6622880 | yahoo:tobyink | jabber:tai (AT) jabber (DOT) linux.it
http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/ | "You've got spam!"
playing://badly_drawn_boy/about_a_boy__original_soundtrack/02_a_peak_you_reach.ogg

West wrote:

"rf" <making.it.up (AT) the (DOT) time> wrote in message
news:mBxOa.441$TX6.6518 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au...
"West" <not (AT) this (DOT) one> wrote in message
news:xlxOa.21967$pK2.33334 (AT) news (DOT) indigo.ie...
"rf" <making.it.up (AT) the (DOT) time> wrote in message
news:FTwOa.391$TX6.3961 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au...
"DaKitty" <Imgonna.com (AT) something (DOT) net> wrote in message
news:y0vOa.91480$Pc5.81702 (AT) fed1read01 (DOT) ..
http://www.cb-design.net

Pictures of text. Not nice to blind/partially sighted people or search
engines.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with "pictures of text"

There is a *lot* wrong with pictures of text.

Your browser, as well as probably every programme you use has icons?

My browser of choice has a text-only toolbar. Any app that gives me the
option of icons and/or text, I pick text only every time. Many icons
are too small to make out enough detail for them to be very useful,
especially at higher resolutions.

In the case of this particular site, the text in the images is much too
small for my comfortable reading. When I turn off image loading, I get
nothing at all. Thus the page is useless.

--
To email a reply, remove (dash)ns(dash). Mail sent to the ns
address is automatically deleted and will not be read.