Site Ratings & Reviews - Site opinions please

Author

Site opinions please

Paul Burke

2004-10-03, 7:14 am

Hi all
I would like constructive comments on this site if I may please.
It is rather a large site and I didn't want to use dhtml.
Esp. would like opinions from blind / partially sighted / AOL / mac /
firefox users.

www.firstpeople.us

Thank you
--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Spartanicus

2004-10-03, 7:14 am

Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us> wrote:

>www.firstpeople.us

Based on index page only:

Good:
Looks nice.
Adapts to my viewport width.
Good font size.

Bad:
Tables used for layout.
Presentational HTML using a Transitional doctype.
>Best viewed at 1024x768 (full screen)
None of your business.
Valid HTML & CSS buttons: don't mention the mechanics.
The " - A Tribute To Native American Indians" bit of the logo image's
alt content duplicates what is in the h1.
Lists of links marked up as a paragraph.

--
Spartanicus

Samuël ML Lison

2004-10-03, 7:14 am

Paul Burke wrote:
> Hi all
> I would like constructive comments on this site if I may please.
> It is rather a large site and I didn't want to use dhtml.
> Esp. would like opinions from blind / partially sighted / AOL / mac /
> firefox users.

Well, the blind will have a terrific time taking a look at the clip art
and what not, if you know what I mean ;o)

--
DreamCities.net - A Community for All (http://www.dreamcities.net)

Paul Burke

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 09:47:02 +0100, Spartanicus <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us> wrote:
>
>

Firstly, Thank you for taking time to look and to reply.

>Based on index page only:
>
>Good:
>Looks nice.
>Adapts to my viewport width.
>Good font size.
Tank you. I have tested it in different monitor sizes and browsers
(yet, not all)

>Bad:
>Tables used for layout.
Why ?
What other way do you suggest please ?

Some say tables are good, others say tables are bad, yet it displays
the way I wanted it to.

>Presentational HTML using a Transitional doctype.
what's that in simple english please. And why is that bad. You lost me
on that one, sorry.

with the monitor turned on ......... it was a poke at all the other
web sites telling you how you should view thier sites. Sorry if you
didn't get the joke <G>
[color=darkred]
> None of your business.
LOL

>Valid HTML & CSS buttons: don't mention the mechanics.
You lost me on that too. What is "mechanics" ?
Sorry if I sound so dumb, But before I can improve, I need to
understand what is wrong.

>The " - A Tribute To Native American Indians" bit of the logo image's
> alt content duplicates what is in the h1.
Is that bad ? I thought it was ok. I didn't want the normal alt="logo"

>Lists of links marked up as a paragraph.
I am going to alter the front page, and I will bear that in mind, I
just wanted a bit more spider food.

thank you
Paul

--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Paul Burke

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 19:04:22 +1000, SamuÃ«l ML Lison
<news@dreamcities.net> wrote:

>Paul Burke wrote:
>
>Well, the blind will have a terrific time taking a look at the clip art
>and what not, if you know what I mean ;o)
ROFL
My next site will be written in braille. You will be able to d/l
bubble wrap and attach it to the monitor screen :P
Seriously, I was trying to complete a few other tests that I cannot
do. eg, AOL browser and/or partially sighted/blind people, as they use
text readers. (and there is a lot of text on the site too)
Thanks for the laugh though
plh
Paul
--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Edwin van der Vaart

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

Paul Burke schreef:
> On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 19:04:22 +1000, Samu=EBl ML Lison
> <news@dreamcities.net> wrote:
>=20
>=20
[color=darkred]
=20[color=darkred]
>=20
> ROFL
> My next site will be written in braille. You will be able to d/l
> bubble wrap and attach it to the monitor screen :P
> Seriously, I was trying to complete a few other tests that I cannot
> do. eg, AOL browser and/or partially sighted/blind people, as they use
> text readers. (and there is a lot of text on the site too)

In that case you can use a text browser emulator at:
http://www.delorie.com/web/lynxview.html

Or you can download a text browser (if you have a windows as OS) at:
http://www.jim.spath.com/lynx_win32/
--=20
Edwin van der Vaart
http://www.semi-conductor.nl/ Links to Semiconductors sites
http://www.evandervaart.nl/ Under construction

kchayka

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

Paul Burke wrote:
>
> Esp. would like opinions from blind / partially sighted / AOL / mac /
> firefox users.
>
> www.firstpeople.us

Per your stylesheet, the main content area uses:
..crafts { font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 14px; line-height: 120%}

I find the text size rather small. My browser default font size is 20px,
so the text is 70% of what I consider optimal. Plus, I don't have
Verdana installed so it might even look even smaller than what most
other people see. So:

1. Don't use Verdana - it has a larger aspect ratio than most other
sans-serif fonts, so authors tend to set font size smaller than they
otherwise would, to compensate. Those visitors without Verdana will
suffer needlessly.

2. Don't set font-size in px units - absolute font-sizes (px, pt, etc.)
are not resizable by default in WinIE, plus whatever size you choose
will be either too large or too small for some portion of your visitors,
perhaps a significant portion. Use % units instead, per published
accessibility guidelines (em units would also be acceptable, except
WinIE has some quirks with these, so stick to %). Body text should be
left at 100%. Stuff like copyright notices might be a bit smaller, but I
wouldn't go below 85% for anything you expect your visitors to actually
read.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

The Doormouse

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us> wrote:

> www.firstpeople.us

It validates, so you have satisfied the basics.
Plus, the graphics are lovely!

Really, very nice ... :)

The colors, graphics, text and layout all works well for me. There does
not seem to be a way to navigate back to the home page, tho.

This is one of those pages that make Usenet worth soemthing.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

The Doormouse

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us> wrote:

> Why ?
> What other way do you suggest please ?

Tables are FINE.

Some people would like you to use all CSS, but this can produce problems
that you will not see with tables. For example, I have seen text columns
laid over one another with a CSS layout, spoiling the legibility and
useability.

Oh, and you can use CSS with tables - it's not an "either ... or" kind of
thing.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

Spartanicus

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us> wrote:

>Why ?

As an HTML element, table is for marking up tabular data. Quality web
sites separate markup from styling.

>What other way do you suggest please ?

CSS.

>Some say tables are good, others say tables are bad, yet it displays
>the way I wanted it to.

Tables are good (for tabular data).

>what's that in simple english please. And why is that bad.

As per above.

>You lost me on that too. What is "mechanics" ?

A site should present it's content, not useless information about the
mechanics of the site.

It's comparable to a footer under a letter saying: "check with MegaSpell
for spelling errors". Very few of your visitors will know what
validation is about, those that do don't care. Ergo: they serve no
useful purpose, at best they confuse and annoy (especially in aural
rendering).

>Is that bad ? I thought it was ok. I didn't want the normal alt="logo"

The title of the site is the correct alt content for the logo image,
just chop off the suffix.

>I am going to alter the front page, and I will bear that in mind, I
>just wanted a bit more spider food.

Spiders follow all links, be they in a paragraph or in a list.

--
Spartanicus

The Doormouse

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

kchayka <usenet@c-net.us> wrote:

> Don't set font-size in px units

Good suggestion. The page looked good in my browser, so I did not look
closer. PX units mean a less adaptable page.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

Paul Burke

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 13:52:45 +0200, Edwin van der Vaart
<picayunish2000@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>Paul Burke schreef:
>
>In that case you can use a text browser emulator at:
>http://www.delorie.com/web/lynxview.html
Thank you for the link. I have tried it (on some) of the pages and
renders acceptable :)

>Or you can download a text browser (if you have a windows as OS) at:
>http://www.jim.spath.com/lynx_win32/

I do have an offline program that shows you what it looks like for a
partially sighted person will see etc, but you can't beat someone
testing it that is actually blind/partial

plh
Paul
--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Paul Burke

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 12:45:27 GMT, The Doormouse <doormouse@att.net>
wrote:

>Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us> wrote:
>
>
>It validates, so you have satisfied the basics.
>Plus, the graphics are lovely!
Thank you very much :)

>Really, very nice ... :)
aaaaaw shucks. thats sweet of you. I have 100s more to put up when I
find time,

>The colors, graphics, text and layout all works well for me. There does
>not seem to be a way to navigate back to the home page, tho.
It is there. It at the bottom of the "misc" list.

>This is one of those pages that make Usenet worth soemthing.
Thank you again. :)

>The Doormouse

plh
Paul
--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Paul Burke

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 12:50:50 GMT, The Doormouse <doormouse@att.net>
wrote:

>Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us> wrote:
>
>
>Tables are FINE.
That's what I hear and it *does* pass validation AND look the way I
wanted it to.
I have seen sites that are 100% css and to be honest, they don't
always look *that good*
Some of my visitors don't are not able to use css (According to my
stats) so by doing all in css will alienate them.

>Some people would like you to use all CSS, but this can produce problems
>that you will not see with tables. For example, I have seen text columns
>laid over one another with a CSS layout, spoiling the legibility and
>useability.
Same here ....... and one where I tried to copy n paste and you have
to do it about and inch higher than the text was <PITA>

>Oh, and you can use CSS with tables - it's not an "either ... or" kind of
>thing.
I am fairly new to css, but only use it where there is a higher
cross-browser compatability in a certain feature.

>The Doormouse

plh
Paul
--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Paul Burke

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 13:52:32 +0100, Spartanicus <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us> wrote:
>
>
>As an HTML element, table is for marking up tabular data. Quality web
>sites separate markup from styling.
>
>
>CSS.
Not all my visitors can use css - according to my stats, so it won't
look the way I wanted it.

>
>Tables are good (for tabular data).
The jury is out on that one. Lets agree to disagree :)

>
>As per above.
ok

>
>A site should present it's content, not useless information about the
>mechanics of the site.
I see. I put that in there for a bit of fun......... and the bit about
recycled web space. <g>

>It's comparable to a footer under a letter saying: "check with MegaSpell
>for spelling errors". Very few of your visitors will know what
>validation is about, those that do don't care. Ergo: they serve no
>useful purpose, at best they confuse and annoy (especially in aural
>rendering).
But it can help if you are applying for a job etc. At least the
interviewer could see that you have taken time to validate the site
etc.
I did a search the other day on web developers and NONE of the ones I
tested passed validation. Some validation they failed on were simple
things like alt missing or /p> instead of </p> for eg.

[color=darkred]
>The title of the site is the correct alt content for the logo image,
>just chop off the suffix.
Okay, will do later, I am off to bed shortly (08.15 here and i've been
up all night <G> )

>
>Spiders follow all links, be they in a paragraph or in a list.

Thank you for your help

plh
Paul
--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Edwin van der Vaart

2004-10-03, 12:15 pm

Paul Burke schreef:
>
>
> I do have an offline program that shows you what it looks like for a
> partially sighted person will see etc, but you can't beat someone
> testing it that is actually blind/partial

I know, but when you can read the page. Including the alternative text
for the images.
Then it should be okay, when blind people or people with less sight
visit your site.
--
Edwin van der Vaart
http://www.semi-conductor.nl/ Links to Semiconductors sites
http://www.evandervaart.nl/ Under construction

Rick Pasotto

2004-10-03, 7:19 pm

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 08:06:37 -0500 in alt.html.critique, Paul Burke
wrote:
> Some of my visitors don't are not able to use css (According to my
> stats) so by doing all in css will alienate them.

How are you able to determine that? What stat shows css capability?

--
"The best portion of a good man's life is his little, nameless,
unremembered acts of kindness and of love." -- William Wordsworth
Rick Pasotto rick@niof.net http://www.niof.net

Neal

2004-10-03, 7:19 pm

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 19:04:22 +1000, Samuël ML Lison <news@dreamcities.net>
wrote:

> Paul Burke wrote:
>
> Well, the blind will have a terrific time taking a look at the clip art
> and what not, if you know what I mean ;o)

Grandma Jones is searching for pictures of tigers for her grandson. She is
totally blind from an accident, but with a screen reader and appropriate
alt text, she can locate images online and email them to his parents.

Neal

2004-10-03, 7:19 pm

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 08:15:38 -0500, Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us>
wrote:

> On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 13:52:32 +0100, Spartanicus <me@privacy.net>
> wrote:
> Not all my visitors can use css - according to my stats, so it won't
> look the way I wanted it.

It's all about you?

If CSS is unsupported, the page degrades to a different yet totally usable
format.

> The jury is out on that one. Lets agree to disagree :)

I don't think so! I agree we disagree, but that still makes you wrong. ;)

> (Valid HTML!!) can help if you are applying for a job etc. At least the
> interviewer could see that you have taken time to validate the site
> etc.

Looking for a job in web design? Either the employer doesn't care, or they
will certainly check themselves. On Opera and IE with a supplementary
toolbar, I can check a page on the validator in one or two clicks.

Looking for a job in anything else? No one outside of web design even
knows about validation, nor do they really need to.

> I did a search the other day on web developers and NONE of the ones I
> tested passed validation. Some validation they failed on were simple
> things like alt missing or /p> instead of </p> for eg.

Yep. And their sites will suffer in many user's environments. Web design
has become creating a fixed, Power-Point type slideshow of pages for a
subset of users who browse like the author does, when it's so much better
to design for ANY user in ANY environment and let the pages be fluid
enough to look good no matter what.

I personally don't mind when I see a site that's poorly authored, unless I
rely on it. The more sites that are not authored to standards, the less
competition a good author faces with the 20% or so users who can't use the
bad sites.

Neal

2004-10-03, 7:19 pm

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 12:50:50 GMT, The Doormouse <doormouse@att.net> wrote:

> Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us> wrote:
>
>
> Tables are FINE.
>
> Some people would like you to use all CSS, but this can produce problems
> that you will not see with tables. For example, I have seen text columns
> laid over one another with a CSS layout, spoiling the legibility and
> useability.

I've seen table layouts where the columns are so narrow the words can't
fit. That's known as "doing it wrong". What you describe above is also an
error in execution.

Don't judge CSS based on people's failed attempts, just as you shouldn't
assume all music is awful after hearing a beginning band concert.

> Oh, and you can use CSS with tables - it's not an "either ... or" kind of
> thing.

This I agree with, provided the table is a table.

The Doormouse

2004-10-03, 11:15 pm

Message-ID: <Xns9577C586E30C7doormouseattnet@68.12.19.6>
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
Lines: 17
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 02:24:58 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.7.112.206
X-Complaints-To: abuse@cox.net
X-Trace: okepread07 1096856698 68.7.112.206 (Sun, 03 Oct 2004 22:24:58 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 22:24:58 EDT
Organization: Cox Communications
Xref: newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com alt.html.critique:53355

Neal <neal413@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Don't judge CSS based on people's failed attempts, just as you shouldn't
> assume all music is awful after hearing a beginning band concert.

What if I told you that I had seen poor CSS on the W3C pages? If anyone
should know good code, they should.

:)

So, when someone says you cannot use tables for layout, I nod my head and
use them anyways. I also use CSS.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

Neal

2004-10-04, 4:15 am

On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 02:24:58 GMT, The Doormouse <doormouse@att.net> wrote:

> Neal <neal413@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> What if I told you that I had seen poor CSS on the W3C pages? If anyone
> should know good code, they should.

Show me.

Paul Burke

2004-10-04, 4:15 am

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 23:13:20 -0400, Neal <neal413@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 02:24:58 GMT, The Doormouse <doormouse@att.net> wrote:
>
>
>Show me.

http://www.csszengarden.com/
Passes w3c and css validation
Now try copy and pasting from the site. See what a PITA it is?
plh
Paul

--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

The Doormouse

2004-10-04, 4:15 am

The Doormouse <doormouse@att.net> wrote:

> but my pages must work on as many browsers as
> possible. That means IE compatibility.

Basically, so long as half my viewers use Internet Explorer, I have to be
careful with using CSS. That's the bottom line.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

The Doormouse

2004-10-04, 4:15 am

Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us> wrote:

> http://www.csszengarden.com/

Saving the site to desktop produced some interesting results, too.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

Paul Burke

2004-10-04, 4:15 am

On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:36:57 -0400, Rick Pasotto
<rickpasotto@chi.news.speakeasy.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 08:06:37 -0500 in alt.html.critique, Paul Burke
>wrote:
>
>How are you able to determine that? What stat shows css capability?
My visitor stats shows it. 3% of visitors do not support css. :(

--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Paul Burke

2004-10-04, 4:15 am

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 12:30:01 -0400, Neal <neal413@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 08:15:38 -0500, Paul Burke <webmaster@firstpeople.us>
>wrote:
>
>
>It's all about you?
What is all about me ? the way I wanted it to be shown as ?

>If CSS is unsupported, the page degrades to a different yet totally usable
>format.
Yes, but I will get larger text than I wanted and then wraps to the
next line. Yes, it will still be "usable" but not in the way I wanted
it to look.

>
>I don't think so! I agree we disagree, but that still makes you wrong. ;)
Whatever.

>
>Looking for a job in web design? Either the employer doesn't care, or they
>will certainly check themselves. On Opera and IE with a supplementary
>toolbar, I can check a page on the validator in one or two clicks.
Possibly. I am a self employed IT Tech and create websites for people
as well as myself. I may be looking for a web design job in the
future.

>Looking for a job in anything else? No one outside of web design even
>knows about validation, nor do they really need to.
Wrong. I know people that are not web designers, but do know about
validation. Please don't make sweeping statements.

>
>Yep. And their sites will suffer in many user's environments. Web design
>has become creating a fixed, Power-Point type slideshow of pages for a
>subset of users who browse like the author does, when it's so much better
>to design for ANY user in ANY environment and let the pages be fluid
>enough to look good no matter what.
True.

>I personally don't mind when I see a site that's poorly authored, unless I
>rely on it. The more sites that are not authored to standards, the less
>competition a good author faces with the 20% or so users who can't use the
>bad sites.
<g>

plh
Paul
--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Paul Burke

2004-10-04, 4:15 am

On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 15:44:05 +0200, Edwin van der Vaart
<picayunish2000@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>Paul Burke schreef:
>
>I know, but when you can read the page. Including the alternative text
>for the images.
>Then it should be okay, when blind people or people with less sight
>visit your site.

This is a pretty good free tool to use to test for blindness/partially
sighted. But it *does* help if real blind testers tested the site,
rather than a machine.
http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/adesigner

plh
Paul

--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

jake

2004-10-04, 12:16 pm

In message <rrcvl0li84gb40v8pcj0uvka89bl176b3c@4ax.com>, Paul Burke
<webmaster@firstpeople.us> writes
>Hi all
>I would like constructive comments on this site if I may please.
>It is rather a large site and I didn't want to use dhtml.
>Esp. would like opinions from blind / partially sighted / AOL / mac /
>firefox users.
>
>www.firstpeople.us
>
>Thank you

Just a few random thoughts:

(a) You need a 'skip navigation' link of some kind as the first entry on
each page. This way, the users of Assistive Technology (AT) UAs
(screen-readers, talking browsers, etc.) don't have to sit and listen to
the menu being read out each time. The link can be made invisible to
graphical browsers, if required.

(b)(i) You need to mark up all the headings on the pages; headings are
*very* important for page navigation to AT users.

'Picture Pages', 'text pages' and 'Misc' are common headings on each
page. ('Misc' would be much better as 'Miscellaneous'.)

(b)(ii) Looking at one of the pages of the 'Legends':

'Eskimo (Inuit)', 'Flathead', 'Gallinomero', etc. are headings.

If I want to hear what Hopi legends are available, I want to get to that
list as quickly as possible -- and one way would be to go into 'headings
navigation mode' and move from one heading to another in that section
until I get to 'Hopi'.

(The use of marked-up headings in the HTML would also match the visual
layout.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the visual front, all looks OK except that the font is too small and
I can't easily enlarge it (MSIE) ..... others will tell you that you
need to specify the font in %.

When the font is enlarged, many of the menu items on the left of the
page take up more than one line. You need to have something (icon, dot,
whatever) to show where each entry begins.

regards.

ps. You might like to try navigating the site via keyboard only (no
mouse).

--
Jake

Rick Pasotto

2004-10-04, 12:16 pm

On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 00:02:18 -0500 in alt.html.critique, Paul Burke
wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:36:57 -0400, Rick Pasotto
> <rickpasotto@chi.news.speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
> My visitor stats shows it. 3% of visitors do not support css. :(

You didn't answer the question. I repeat, *what* stat?

None of the items in my Apache logs state whether or not the user
'supports css'. You must be extrapolating that conclusion from some fact
that *does* appear in the logs. What is it that you are extrapolating
from?

--
To have doubted one's own first principles is the mark of a civilized man.
-Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr., poet, novelist, essayist, and physician
(1809-1894)
Rick Pasotto rick@niof.net http://www.niof.net

kchayka

2004-10-04, 12:16 pm

Paul Burke wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:36:57 -0400, Rick Pasotto
> <rickpasotto@chi.news.speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
> My visitor stats shows it. 3% of visitors do not support css. :(

Can you be more specific about how you determine CSS support? Do you
look at the browser they use, the files that are accessed, or what? And
what statistics package are you using?

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

Paul Burke

2004-10-04, 12:16 pm

On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 08:45:14 -0400, Rick Pasotto
<rickpasotto@chi.news.speakeasy.net> wrote:

>On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 00:02:18 -0500 in alt.html.critique, Paul Burke
>wrote:
>
>You didn't answer the question. I repeat, *what* stat?
I did answer it ............... My visitor stats shows it.
Maybe I didn't go into enough detail, see below for more details.

>None of the items in my Apache logs state whether or not the user
>'supports css'. You must be extrapolating that conclusion from some fact
>that *does* appear in the logs. What is it that you are extrapolating
>from?

I have a stats counter on my page. It also gives me a breakdown of
timezones / broswers used / ISP / entry amd exit pages / time visiting
site / who's on etc ......... also it lets me know if the visitor's
browser supports css or not ......... in my case 3% of visitors do
not.

These stats can only be accessed by my site meter account, Not by the
visitor.
Here is a link to the pic.
http://www.firstpeople.us/css.jpg

plh
Paul
--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Paul Burke

2004-10-04, 12:16 pm

On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 07:53:39 -0500, kchayka <usenet@c-net.us> wrote:

>Paul Burke wrote:
>
>Can you be more specific about how you determine CSS support?
with my eyes.

>Do you
>look at the browser they use, the files that are accessed, or what? And
>what statistics package are you using?
this is what I look at. ...............
http://www.firstpeople.us/css.jpg

and the package is called site meter
--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

Paul Burke

2004-10-04, 12:16 pm

On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 12:00:54 +0100, jake <jake@gododdin.demon.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <rrcvl0li84gb40v8pcj0uvka89bl176b3c@4ax.com>, Paul Burke
><webmaster@firstpeople.us> writes
>
>Just a few random thoughts:
>
>(a) You need a 'skip navigation' link of some kind as the first entry on
>each page. This way, the users of Assistive Technology (AT) UAs
>(screen-readers, talking browsers, etc.) don't have to sit and listen to
>the menu being read out each time. The link can be made invisible to
>graphical browsers, if required.
I am looking into that atm. But I am off to bed shortly and will
continue that line when I get up. Don't expect the changes to be made
straight away as you are talking about a 3600 page site. And I have
redesigned it 4 or 5 times already.

>(b)(i) You need to mark up all the headings on the pages; headings are
>*very* important for page navigation to AT users.
In what way do you mean "mark up" please ?

> ('Misc' would be much better as 'Miscellaneous'.)
True, lazyness on my part

>(b)(ii) Looking at one of the pages of the 'Legends':
>
>'Eskimo (Inuit)', 'Flathead', 'Gallinomero', etc. are headings.
>
>If I want to hear what Hopi legends are available, I want to get to that
>list as quickly as possible -- and one way would be to go into 'headings
>navigation mode' and move from one heading to another in that section
>until I get to 'Hopi'.
I did have it in that sort of way where I had all Nations listed on
one page and then click onto say, Cherokke and would take you to a
list of Cherokee Legends. But there is one major drawback with that
option. By listing all the Nations on one page, made the html page far
too large.

>(The use of marked-up headings in the HTML would also match the visual
>layout.)
Again, something I will look at when I get up. I thought a header was
a header, but it seems it is more than that.
My pages do have headers, and headers that are related to the page. So
I will have to understand what "marked-up headings" is before I can
fix.
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>On the visual front, all looks OK except that the font is too small and
>I can't easily enlarge it (MSIE) ..... others will tell you that you
>need to specify the font in %.
Well, my friend has poor eyesight and she see's it ok. See is always
complaining about about not being able to read text. Yet she had no
problems with it. So I used her as a benchmark.

>When the font is enlarged, many of the menu items on the left of the
>page take up more than one line. You need to have something (icon, dot,
>whatever) to show where each entry begins.
Thats why I used a fixed font size in css. I didn't want people to
enlarge that bit due to that fact it will wrap to two lines. And I did
not want to make the menu even larger.

>regards.
And to you too :)

>ps. You might like to try navigating the site via keyboard only (no
>mouse).
Maybe. <G>
I have enough to do atm.
Thank you for your remarks
plh
Paul
--
www.FirstPeople.us
Native Clipart, Wallpaper Pictures, Legends, Wisdom, Art, Poems and much, much more

kchayka

2004-10-04, 12:16 pm

The Doormouse wrote:
> Neal <neal413@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> http://validator.w3.org/checklink
> The word "options" is intersected by the dotted line. Obviously, they
> meant for the word to be above the dotted box.

By "above" do you mean in the foreground, or do you mean on a separate
line over it rather than overlaying it? I can't tell. To clarify, the
word should overlay the dotted line because it is a <legend> for a
<fieldset>. And it does, it just has a transparent background in IE so
the fieldset border shows through.

> and do not claim that "IE6 is broken".

But it is. :-) See below.

> I notice that Firefox renders both pages differently (correctly?),

Opera and mozilla give comparable renderings (as expected), so IE is
definitely the odd browser out.

> but IE is still the number one browser.

IE is without a doubt the most-used browser, but I cringe at calling it
#1. Makes it sound superior, when it clearly is not. ;)

> W3C is welcome to cram standards down everyone's throats,

One possibility of why the W3C pages are the way they are is an aversion
to using CSS hacks or browser-specific code to work around rendering
issues. Considering who they are, I think they have every right to do
that. They are not in the business of teaching how to deal with buggy
browsers, but with standards. There is nothing wrong with their code in
this regard.

If you think they are wrong, file a bug with them. They might even
change the stylesheet if you ask them nicely.
<URL:http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Contact>

> but my pages must work on as many browsers as
> possible. That means IE compatibility.

For the most part, it can be pretty easy to overcome IE bugs, all you
need is a little practice and some good reference sites, such as:
<URL:http://centricle.com/ref/css/filters/>
<URL:http://macedition.com/cb/resources/...csssupport.html>
<URL:http://www.positioniseverything.net/>

BTW, a simple workaround for IE on the above W3C page is to add:
legend {
background-color: #fff;
color: #000;
padding: 0 .5em;
}

There were also some interesting results in IE when I experimented with
border properties on the fieldset. The line does not show through the
legend text until the border-style is changed. So border-width and
border-color don't cause problems. I'd call that a bug, how about you?

You aren't just making excuses for using inappropriate and archaic
layout techniques now, are you? ;)

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

The Doormouse

2004-10-04, 12:16 pm

kchayka <usenet@c-net.us> wrote:

> You aren't just making excuses for using inappropriate and archaic
> layout techniques now, are you? ;)

Nope. I am pointing out that the W3C pages are not all IE6 compatible -
and that's the home of the CSS standards. Glass houses and such, you
know.

My preference is that my pages work as intended across as many browsers
as possible. Since about fifty percent or more of users are using
Internet Explorer, I have to design with it in mind.

The purists flogging CSS forget that results count. In the real world, if
a page barfs up on a major browser (IE6), that's a problem.

I know that a combination of tables and CSS, or pure tables, will always
work across all major browsers. That's the real deal. Consistent,
reliable results are the bottom line.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

Ben Measures

2004-10-04, 7:17 pm

Paul Burke wrote:
> Spartanicus wrote:
>
> Why?

Tables intertwine content and presentation making for very inflexible
code. They also have problems with:
* image layout
- sometimes images have to be sliced to fit in cells. Redesigns are
hell.
* incremental rendering
- usually the contents of the whole table must be downloaded before
they can be rendered.
* screen readers
- screen readers read the content as if the tables do not exist. The
content is read in the order that it appears in the source, not as it
appears in a browser supporting tables.

For the past few years w3.org has been making efforts towards the
separation of content and presentation. This has been shown to have
numerous advantages. By making independent content from presentation you
can:
* reduce code download
- the presentation only has to be downloaded once.
* create simple content
- you only need to markup content. The presentation is applied with
little effort on your part.
* apply new presentations easily
- you can redesign your whole website by editing only one file. You
can also offer multiple designs for the user to choose from.

> What other way do you suggest please?

Separate content from presentation. Although not perfect, CSS can help
you in this respect.

--
Ben M.

The Doormouse

2004-10-04, 7:17 pm

Ben Measures <saint_abroadremove@removehotmail.com> wrote:

>
> Separate content from presentation. Although not perfect, CSS can help
> you in this respect.

With server-side scripting or an XML-based generation system you can
seperate content from presentation while using nested tables. You can
make a total rat's nest, and it will be super easy to update. CSS is not
the only solution, nor even always the best.

CSS is not a wonder-pill ( though I *might* be ... LOL )

:)

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

kchayka

2004-10-04, 7:17 pm

Paul Burke wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Oct 2004 07:53:39 -0500, kchayka <usenet@c-net.us> wrote:
>
> with my eyes.

<g>

> this is what I look at. ...............
> http://www.firstpeople.us/css.jpg

It doesn't say how it determined that number. How do you know it's a
valid statistic? How do you know that 3% isn't just search engines and
spiders that crawled through? What browsers constitute that number? If
you can't get that info, how can you know the number is real?

> and the package is called site meter

Hmmm, I think this is fairly widely used, but I can't say whether it is
actually more useful than what you normally get out of AWstats or other
standard Apache stats packages.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.