Site Ratings & Reviews - jasc - just another site critique

Author

jasc - just another site critique

julianmlp@gmail.com

2006-07-10, 11:07 pm

It's in test phase, so any comments will be welcome
www.titre.com.ar

regards - jm

fred.haab@gmail.com

2006-07-10, 11:07 pm

I suppose it looks OK, but there's a couple of things I noticed right
away, both have to do with separating presentation from content..

Your styles should be declared in a separate file.

You used tables for layout instead of css (usually with divs).

The validator plug-in for Firefox shows 32 warnings, including things
like using <p> for spacing instead of properly defined CSS.

The content is too vertical. You have to scroll down a lot for very
little information.

Javascript can also be completely removed from the content (html), but
you did a good job since the page loads OK without javascript enabled
(I have it off by default).

Just my two cents.

julianmlp@XXXXXXXXXX wrote:
> It's in test phase, so any comments will be welcome
> www.titre.com.ar
>
> regards - jm

julianmlp@gmail.com

2006-07-10, 11:07 pm

fred.haab@gxxxxail.com wrote:
> I suppose it looks OK, but there's a couple of things I noticed right
> away, both have to do with separating presentation from content..
>
> Your styles should be declared in a separate file.

They are in fact definet through an external css file

>
> You used tables for layout instead of css (usually with divs).

Yes, I am slowly changing such a kind of crime ;)

>
> The validator plug-in for Firefox shows 32 warnings, including things
> like using <p> for spacing instead of properly defined CSS.

Most of the errors are related to "alt" missing attribute

> The content is too vertical. You have to scroll down a lot for very
> little information.

That's true.

> Javascript can also be completely removed from the content (html), but
> you did a good job since the page loads OK without javascript enabled
> (I have it off by default).

so do you never visit an ajax powered site? I mean, you don't even
have a gmail account? Ohhh, I didn't see! You have already a gmail
acc....
Or do you turn on javascript specially for a particular site?

> Just my two cents.

Thanks

reagards - julian

Paul Watt

2006-07-10, 11:07 pm

<julianmlp@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote in message
news:1149039528.870948.94510@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> fred.haab@gxxxxail.com wrote:
>
> They are in fact definet through an external css file
>
>
> Yes, I am slowly changing such a kind of crime ;)
>
>
> Most of the errors are related to "alt" missing attribute
>
>
>
> That's true.
>
>
> so do you never visit an ajax powered site? I mean, you don't even
> have a gmail account? Ohhh, I didn't see! You have already a gmail
> acc....
> Or do you turn on javascript specially for a particular site?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> reagards - julian
>

AJAX is the work of the devil. Many.many sites will be broken if this trend
continues

Paul

fred.haab@gmail.com

2006-07-10, 11:07 pm

julianmlp@XXXXXXXXXX wrote:
> fred.haab@gxxxxail.com wrote:

>
> They are in fact definet through an external css file

There may be some, but I saw a lot of styles declared inline in the
document.

>
> so do you never visit an ajax powered site? I mean, you don't even
> have a gmail account? Ohhh, I didn't see! You have already a gmail
> acc....
> Or do you turn on javascript specially for a particular site?

Firefox, among the many other helpful things, has an extension called
"NoScript" that has scripts turned off by default, it let's you know
when a site has javascript, and gives you the option of enabling for
that site (permanently or temporarily).

So yes, I have it enabled for google and gmail. Having it disabled
avoids the vast majority of unwanted popups.

julianmlp@gmail.com

2006-07-10, 11:07 pm

fred.haab@XXXXXXXXXX wrote:

> Firefox, among the many other helpful things, has an extension called
> "NoScript" that has scripts turned off by default, it let's you know
> when a site has javascript, and gives you the option of enabling for
> that site (permanently or temporarily).
>
> So yes, I have it enabled for google and gmail. Having it disabled
> avoids the vast majority of unwanted popups.

I had no idea such an extension exists. I'm a FF user myself. I'll
search for it...

regards - julian

julianmlp@gmail.com

2006-07-10, 11:07 pm

Paul Watt wrote:

> AJAX is the work of the devil. Many.many sites will be broken if this trend
> continues

Are you being serious?
Well, you could have your reasons, but I think it's late

regards - julian

Eric Bohlman

2006-07-10, 11:07 pm

julianmlp@XXXXXXXXXX wrote in
news:1149110277.253133.120870@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

> Paul Watt wrote:
>
>
> Are you being serious?
> Well, you could have your reasons, but I think it's late

One reason could be the same as one of the primary objections to frames:
misuse of AJAX can create unaddressable page configurations; that is to
say, pages that can't be reached directly from a specific URL, but only by
starting at a particular URL and drilling down through a series of clicks.
If that were really acceptable, the WWW would never have overtaken Gopher.
There are some cases where unaddressability isn't really a problem; on a
forum/blog type of site where you can expand various messages in a thread
(e.g. Daily Kos) it really isn't a problem that you don't have a unique URL
for each combination of expansion/contraction. That kind of use of AJAX is
IMHO legitimate. But other cases are either illegitimate or need to be
augmented to preserve addressability; zoom levels for maps and scroll
position within database tables are examples.