[Wsuug] Updated/new site

Erin Walsh erin.walsh at dominionenterprises.com
Fri Jan 25 17:28:30 EST 2008 

Actually, I respectfully disagree with Joshua's critique of the  
simplicity of the site and with the recommendation to add a top  
margin (or simply bump the page down 100-150 px).  As Joshua alludes,  
everyone will have their own opinions.  It may be fun for us to test  
the site so we can separate personal opinion from the best  
representation of who we are and what we do.  Then again, I am a  
total geek when it comes to user testing, so I'm always trying to  
angle for testing to be done.

It's come up in the past, but I do think it would be an excellent  
topic for a meeting to discuss flash and the different sides of the  
debate.  I think it would be interesting to get input from a group of  
us, as we all work in different realms and technologies.


erin walsh | product developer | For Rent Media Solutions™
150 granby street, 16th floor | norfolk, va 23510
p:757.351.8444 | f:757.961.4827
erin.walsh at ForRent.com| www.FRMediaSolutions.com


You Have Multiple Marketing Needs... We Have Multiple Solutions!



On Jan 25, 2008, at 4:37 PM, Joshua McDonald wrote:

Semantically you're not going to get much clearer with that header  
setup...its very clear.  Screenreaders, search bots..etc will pick  
that up great.

Now, me personally...I hate large type on a page...because it becomes  
jagged (even in Vista/EI7 with their smoothing).  Something that we  
generally do is flash headers.

Your code there wouldn't actually need to change.  When we did it  
(joshspear.com ... its a table-based layout...was before I went CSS)  
you can see that the titles are all nice and smooth, and (more  
importantly here) a non-default font.  My code for it there wasn't - 
as- clean as I would do it now, but the basis is the same.  You leave  
the html as yo have it.  You have javascript call swfobject code to  
replace the header tags with a nice flash piece.

On that note...its a point of debate whether flash is evil.  I  
personally don't think so, as long as content is readable/accessible  
without it, and this way provides that because if flash isn't present/ 
disabled, the code does nothing and leaves your tags to display as  
they are...

As for other opinions (I know...but I get started..and once I get  
started.... :)  )

I would pull the page down from the top a bit.  Frankly, with the  
small amount of content, and being at the top, it looks like even  
less.  If you moved it down a bit, it would create the illusion of  
more content...not much, a 150px maybe would do it (or maybe  
100...have to see it really).

And for the long run, it needs to be livened up a bit.  One of the  
big misconceptions is that is too much work to be both semantically  
correct and usable, and at the same time look good.  Right now, the  
site is very usable, but lacking in visual appeal.

But, those are just my opinions, and you know what they say about  
those...  :)



On Jan 25, 2008 4:21 PM, Andrew Jaswa <ajaswa at gmail.com> wrote:
Everything should be all happy and semantic now. The h2 was added to
the header like it was before I went mucking about with things. Also
Ryan and I weren't really feeling the centered text at the top so it
got shifted to the left and image removed.

So heres a question (mainly for the folks who write html out there):
What can I do to make the header section more semantic and possibility
more "readable"? By readable I mean not just with your eyes. Code
below.


<div id="Header">
                <h1>WSUUG</h1>
                <h2>Web Standards and Usability User Group</h2>
</div>


Andrew

On Jan 24, 2008 4:00 PM, Andrew Jaswa <ajaswa at gmail.com> wrote:
 > Hey Josh,
 >
 > The alt text for image works for the H1 (which can be read by both
 > screen readers and search spiders). I am planning on redoing that
 > though with sifr (or with plain text) later tonight.  As for the H2 I
 > kinda forgot about that... heh. Good catch though thanks!
 >
 > If you have any ideas for content please let me know. I'm planning on
 > posting the slides and notes from presentations (once we get  
around to
 > them) on the site. Its also not meant to be an overly content heavy
 > site more information and getting people to come to meetings then
 > anything.
 >
 > Anyways good comments thanks!
 >
 > Andrew
 >
 >
 > On Jan 24, 2008 3:48 PM, Joshua McDonald <josh at thisisgrow.com> wrote:
 > > I think this is my first time jumping into the email  
conversation...
 > >
 > > I like the site...its simple...clean...a little lacking in  
content...but not
 > > bad...
 > >
 > > 1 thing though...since it is a "usability" site...your headings...
 > >
 > > The document outline is
 > >
 > > H1 - [No Heading Text]
 > >     H2 - [Missing Heading]
 > >           H3 - About.
 > >                H4 - Why?
 > >                H4 - Who?
 > > H3 and H4 are good, but Without H1 and H2, its silly to jump to  
3.  Since
 > > you have the title as an image, you should still do this:
 > >
 > > <h1>wsuug</h1>
 > > <h2>web standards and usability group</h2>
 > >
 > > -OR-
 > >
 > > <h1>wssug - web standards and usability group</h2> ... and then  
move the
 > > other (h3 + h4) to h2 + h3.
 > >
 > > then just style h1/h2 (first example) or h1 (second) to be  
display:none.
 > >
 > > One of the things I always try to do is get the document outline  
to look
 > > right (if you have the Web Dev Toolbar in firefox, its in  
"information ->
 > > view document outline") ... as it helps usability, and it also  
helps alot in
 > > the weighting terms by search bots...
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > On Jan 24, 2008 3:38 PM, Andrew Jaswa <ajaswa at gmail.com> wrote:
 > > >
 > > >
 > > >
 > > > Hey Folks,
 > > >
 > > > I updated the wsuug site today.
 > > >
 > > > If you have any links for the resources page please include a
 > > > description of the site and what grouping it should be in.
 > > >
 > > >
 > > > http://wsuug.org
 > > >
 > > > Enjoy.
 > > >
 > > > Andrew
 > > > _______________________________________________
 > > > Wsuug mailing list
 > > > Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
 > > > http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
 > > >
 > >
 > >
 > >
 > > --
 > > Joshua McDonald
 > > Grow Interactive
 > > www.thisisgrow.com
 > > 757-248-5274
 > > 757-248-5275 (f)
 > > _______________________________________________
 > > Wsuug mailing list
 > > Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
 > > http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
 > >
 > >
 >
_______________________________________________
Wsuug mailing list
Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug



-- 
Joshua McDonald
Grow Interactive
www.thisisgrow.com
757-248-5274
757-248-5275 (f)
_______________________________________________
Wsuug mailing list
Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.thelinuxlink.net/pipermail/wsuug/attachments/20080125/9cea7e07/attachment-0001.html

More information about the Wsuug mailing list