Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » Anyone want a website?

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
 1   2   3   4 
Anyone want a website?
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

Anomie said:

Design comes next, do you want me to wing it or would you like to go through the standard 'client questionnaire' process ('describe the organization in five words', 'rate the organization on the following, between one and ten', etc)?

Basically I want something clean, simple, and professional.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

piccolo
Member #3,163
January 2003
avatar

I need a web site/ online system.

for Atlantic Tailoring you can find them on face book.
its a tailoring shop.

wow
-------------------------------
i am who you are not am i

Anomie
Member #9,403
January 2008
avatar

I've been thinking about it a bit more and I guess the game probably isn't really in a complete enough state to warrant a website. I've not yet even committed to a name for it

That probably means I'd have just enough time to build the thing. :P Call it 'Lands of Lohr'.

But yeah, sounds good. If you're going to be passing around game assets, do you want to do this through email?

Basically I want something clean, simple, and professional.

I'm on it! I'll stick with the blue/(white/grey) + serifed font.

piccolo said:

for Atlantic Tailoring you can find them on face book. its a tailoring shop.

That doesn't sound fun. :( I am for hire though! ;)

______________
I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.

Mordredd
Member #5,291
December 2004
avatar

If you want to learn something and do something productive you can help me working on a build server. I have hacked together a quick site here:

http://xhoch3.dyndns.org/

It's performing nightly builds showing the console output of the build process live on the site. I can maintain this myself, but if someones takes care of that I can concentrate more on core development.

Felix-The-Ghost
Member #9,729
April 2008
avatar

Your website is really interesting. The "Clients Only" part was cool. I assume you know none of the links work.

For Tom's site, one could argue that SEO rank is improved by having multiple, focused pages, instead of everything on one page (If he cares). I personally would also find it "easy" to navigate if there were dedicated pages on pricing or services.

==========================
<--- The ghost with the most!
---------------------------
[Website] [Youtube]

Anomie
Member #9,403
January 2008
avatar

I can maintain this myself, but if someones takes care of that I can concentrate more on core development.

Sounds interesting, could I get some more details of what you're looking for?

Your website is really interesting. The "Clients Only" part was cool.

I was wondering if anyone would find that. :P Ph34r my digital collage skillz.

Quote:

For Tom's site, one could argue that SEO rank is improved by having multiple, focused pages, instead of everything on one page (If he cares).

That's true, but I'd think in the case of a local business the value of SEO on individual services is basically moot compared to SEO for location. That said, I don't bill myself as an SEO expert. :-[

add:

So here's draft one Mr. Thomas, don't pay too much attention to things below the Big Blue Bar(c). I started playing with wording for some things, realized I was a little tired fairly quickly. :P Let me know if I should carry on and polish it up, or if I'm off course.

{"name":"604826","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/6\/0\/605d38e6710d4e18ce8397e1a4a764e3.png","w":1920,"h":1080,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/6\/0\/605d38e6710d4e18ce8397e1a4a764e3"}604826

______________
I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

Anomie said:

So here's draft one Mr. Thomas, don't pay too much attention to things below the Big Blue Bar(c). I started playing with wording for some things, realized I was a little tired fairly quickly. Let me know if I should carry on and polish it up, or if I'm off course.

I like that. A lot.

Is your layout easily re-formable to a mobile (phone) screen? How hard would it be to add a separate css file just for phones (and maybe tablets?). I've had some complaints that my site doesn't work well on phones :(

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Anomie
Member #9,403
January 2008
avatar

bamccaig said:

That looks really good, Anomie.

I like that. A lot.

{"name":"282fae47-4d5d-4838-90aa-4a96b96f7e75.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/0\/9\/09fa3b081191f634ab7afa4821919d37.jpg","w":500,"h":375,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/0\/9\/09fa3b081191f634ab7afa4821919d37"}282fae47-4d5d-4838-90aa-4a96b96f7e75.jpg

:P

Quote:

Is your layout easily re-formable to a mobile (phone) screen? How hard would it be to add a separate css file just for phones (and maybe tablets?).

It should be -- there aren't any images or anything to limit the size. I'd make 'Tom's Computers' a little smaller and cut the width of the page down to match that width, maybe remove the tagline and move the contact info into a similar position on the right side of the 'p'. I'd probably take the pitch paragraph out, and possibly remove the descriptions of each service (they could be a little wordy for phones). All that's pretty easy to do with CSS based on media queries. :)

But like I said above, I don't really have any mobile browsers/devices to test it on. :( Except my tablet, which has a higher resolution than my netbook, and doesn't really count.

______________
I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

Yeah, I should be able to figure it out. But I hate html and css. Almost as much as I hate javascript.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Anomie
Member #9,403
January 2008
avatar

But I hate html and css. Almost as much as I hate javascript.

Aw. :( I guess I was lucky enough to jump on the bandwagon when HTML5, CSS3 and jQuery started being feasible options. I'm really happy with all of them. Interestingly though, your thing uses practically none of my usual CSS3 fanciness, and should look roughly the same all the way back to IE6! :o

______________
I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Programmers hate to learn HTML and CSS because they aren't programming languages. The former is a markup document and the latter is effectively a style data file. :) They were designed for documentation and layout. You have to think completely differently about them to achieve a goal.

I hated Web languages in college. The college didn't teach CSS beyond the very basics and basically just introduced HTML as a set of tags. The textbooks just had you transcribe a "working" document and open it in a Web browser. You got to see how it looked (which often varied wildly from browser to browser), but had no idea how it got there. :P Anybody teaching HTML should make it a rule to give CSS as much significance as HTML, if not more; you can't effectively use one without the other. They should probably just zip through XHTML syntax, basic tags, and perhaps the box model; and then introduce semantic design and CSS and spend the rest of the semester on that. :)

As for JavaScript, I hated it because at the time it felt like a toy language compared to the real languages I was learning, like C, C++, and Java. I'm pretty good with JavaScript, but I hold the opinion that JavaScript should be entirely optional, so I don't place much emphasis on it. Also, the browser environment suffers from far too much global state to really be enjoyable.

After working with HTML, CSS, and ~XML for about 5 years, I now understand the usefulness of them and don't mind them so much. I still suck at design (e.g., https://www.castopulence.org/), but I have a half decent handle on semantic markup and basic CSS: the Castopulence Software Web site is actually XSL<XHTML> + XML + CSS.

Anomie
Member #9,403
January 2008
avatar

bamccaig said:

Programmers hate to learn HTML and CSS because they aren't programming languages.

Yeeeah, fair enough. I didn't think too much about HTML until I found aspects of it to really sink my teeth into, and built a value system for what 'good markup' is.

Quote:

As for JavaScript, I hated it because at the time it felt like a toy language compared to the real languages I was learning, like C, C++, and Java.

I kind of feel that way, but it doesn't bother me. :) I basically use a couple dozen lines of JS for progressive enhancement stuff and call it good. I don't really feel like it being more of a 'toy' is a bad thing, possibly because my introduction to JS (via jQuery) was writing a web-based SQL*Plus clone (which introduces some neat things you'd expect from a modern terminal, as well as MySQL support, while also managing to be used by absolutely no one ;D).

______________
I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Anomie said:

I kind of feel that way, but it doesn't bother me. :) I basically use a couple dozen lines of JS for progressive enhancement stuff and call it good. I don't really feel like it being more of a 'toy' is a bad thing, possibly because my introduction to JS (via jQuery) was writing a web-based SQL*Plus clone (which introduces some neat things you'd expect from a modern terminal, as well as MySQL support, while also managing to be used by absolutely no one ;D).

I'm not sure what SQL*Plus is, but I'm going to assume it's a GUI client for a DBMS ... In which case, I'd say you definitely do not want a Web interface for this. ;D There's just far too much that can go wrong. :P You don't want to bring database administration to the masses! Databases require a technical mind for design and management... Microsoft Access is one of the worst monsters ever unleashed upon the Earth by Microsoft.

Append:

Oh good god! That UI appears to connect to a third party database server given the user entered credentials! It's not even running over HTTPS! >:( YOU OWE LIKE $100k to http://codeoffsets.com/ for this. >:( And please, for all that is FSM approved, take that site down before you cost somebody their business... :-X

Anomie
Member #9,403
January 2008
avatar

bamccaig said:

Oh good god! That UI appears to connect to a third party database server given the user entered credentials! It's not even running over HTTPS!

>:D School project, doesn't count in real life! 8-)

______________
I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

I hate HTML and CSS and JavaScript because its impossible to get a page rendering the same in all browsers (and versions there of) without banging your head against your desk till you die. It is completely non deterministic.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Anomie
Member #9,403
January 2008
avatar

I hate HTML and CSS and JavaScript because its impossible to get a page rendering the same in all browsers (and versions there of) without banging your head against your desk till you die. It is completely non deterministic.

The trick is not to care. :) Build for your browser of choice, run damage control on the others until diminishing returns say stop.

______________
I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Anomie said:

>:D School project, doesn't count in real life! 8-)

I hope they failed you! :-[

I hate HTML and CSS and JavaScript because its impossible to get a page rendering the same in all browsers (and versions there of) without banging your head against your desk till you die. It is completely non deterministic.

If you're trying to create a work of art then this matters. If you just want a Web site that looks clean and efficiently shares information with the world then it's less important for it to look pixel-perfect and more important that it just degrades nicely.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

Damage control should not be necessary. Why can't they all just bloody follow the standard. Bastards.

The first version of my website was COMPLETELY broken in IE to begin with. And rendered fine in Chrome and Firefox. Sure it was a PEBKAC error, but still. I didn't know about it for a few weeks.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

The way I see it, your job as a Web developer is to write the standards compliant XHTML, XSL, XML, CSS, etc. Rendering that properly and behaving properly is the browser developer's problem. They can fix it once or the rest of the world can fix it billions of times. Leave your site broken in substandard browsers and let the users discover for themselves which browsers work best. If the Web had worked this way years ago the IE developers would have been FORCED to be standards compliant. Which is the only reason they're becoming more standards compliant now. More and more developers are just saying, fuck you; and leaving a nice little disclaimer on the site for users of substandard browsers. Just to make it clear, it's not me, it's you.

Anomie
Member #9,403
January 2008
avatar

Damage control should not be necessary. Why can't they all just bloody follow the standard.

Amen. :( In my early work, pages would work fine in Webkit stuff (I develop in Chrome), maybe half a dozen lines of CSS to fix it up for Firefox, then a two-week slog to get all the IE problems worked out. Since then I've sort of come to terms with it as a part of the process - by expecting it, it just becomes another limitation of the medium (and limitations are good!). In the early stages I take steps to avoid things that I know might be fishy, and so I have less to fix later.

add:

bamccaig said:

The way I see it, your job as a Web developer is to write the standards compliant XHTML, XSL, XML, CSS, etc.

That's all well and good, but your job as a website (yeah, you are the website) is to work for everyone. :( No one using a substandard browser will stop to consider that they are using a substandard browser, they will just assume you're lazy and that you only make websites for 'crazy hippies' or something (their email and bank pages work fine, after all). This is especially true when you're trying to build something for a client -- there are no excuses (except maybe for IE6).

When you're just making stuff for yourself, it's fine to take some liberties with who you want to serve and who you don't want to serve (for instance, leaving my website broken in IE<9 is a good way to filter out clients that I maybe just don't want to work for), but if it's a job for someone else it better work for the client's grandmother running AOL 2 on her Windows 95 machine.

add again:

Quote:

If the Web had worked this way years ago the IE developers would have been FORCED to be standards compliant. Which is the only reason they're becoming more standards compliant now.

Speaking of that, I read through the Wikipedia article for Embrace, Extend and Extinguish about a week ago, which is a term used internally by Microsoft to describe the process of smothering competition by extending standards in such a way that the market is forced to become subsidiary or obsolete. :-/

So the whole 'IE is incapable of Internet' game is a back-assward strategic ploy by Microsoft to keep their incompetent software relevant in the face of capable competition?

______________
I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

Anomie said:

In the early stages I take steps to avoid things that I know might be fishy, and so I have less to fix later.

Working around blatant bugs and mis-features in products I'm attempting to use makes me find another product. I don't mind it if there's one or two odd bugs, especially if the vendor fixes it in a reasonable time frame. Sadly that just doesn't happen with browsers. They all think they are doing it right, and anything you think is a bug is a "feature". ie: they meant it to be broken.

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

Mark Oates
Member #1,146
March 2001
avatar

I'm just kinda skimming the thread here, but I thought I'd drop this in.

In general, it's best to use HTML as markup that outlines and describes only the information - no layout at all. The information should be logically organized and easy to parse (if you were to do so). From that point on you should be using css to do the layout.

There are a number of different reasons to do this, one of which is that you can easily make different css files for different screens and output formats. You should never use HTML to position objects around on the page (e.g. <br><br><br><br>), or explicitly define the appearance (a <font> tag, for example). Likewise, you should never use tags like <b> or <i> because they describe the appearance. Instead, use the tags that define the content, <em> for emphasis or <strong> for strong. And so fourth :)...

MiquelFire
Member #3,110
January 2003
avatar

The pattern I used to develop my latest page was this (which is not live, got distracted and eventually never have time to look back at it):

  1. Like Oates said, HTML for information purposes only. When I did this step, I sort of figured "Would it be usable in Lynx/Links". I think I used some p tags where some HTML5 tag alone would be good enough for that (I remember one of them two didn't even support div!)

  2. I applied CSS so that mobile would work. At the time, I used a DSi and a Moto Backflip (horrible phone, I'm glad that thing broke, but not glad it broke because of some $100 fee to get a new phone mid-contract, on top of the price of the new phone)

  3. Using media queries, I added more CSS so that it would be formatted like my current site. Whenever I get back to it, I need to make the header in the new way I'm handling it.

  4. Site doesn't use any JS however.

I may dump what I did and start again as I don't like the file structure of it (and I plan to switch the JS from YUI3 to jQuery, still keeping the YUI CSS stuff though)

---
Febreze (and other air fresheners actually) is just below perfumes/colognes, and that's just below dead skunks in terms of smells that offend my nose.
MiquelFire.red | +Me
If anyone is of the opinion that there is no systemic racism in America, they're either blind, stupid, or racist too. ~Edgar Reynaldo

Mark Oates
Member #1,146
March 2001
avatar

bamccaig said:

The way I see it, your job as a Web developer is to write the standards compliant XHTML, XSL, XML, CSS, etc.

To follow-up with what Anomie said... When you're writing a website, you should be writing with two audiences in mind:

  1. Users

  2. Search Engines

When you don't focus on that and instead focus on perfectly slicing to an XHTML/CSS compliance standard, you're writing for the wrong audience - a layout engine.

There is also a third audience that you should also be paying attention to, and that's yourself. Or, the "the developers" if there is more than one person working on the site. You should write in a way that is easiest for you (and/or them) to work with.

Before I get bammed ( :P ), just know that my main point that it's important to focus your energies on the priorities, instead of following an arbitrary doctrine.

p.s. In some cases there's also a fourth audience, the client. But that's a whole different can of worms.

 1   2   3   4 


Go to: