[Wsuug] Updated/new site
Andrew Jaswa
ajaswa at gmail.com
Fri Jan 25 17:48:20 EST 2008
Good point Erin we should do some user testing. Now if we can just
find some users for a user group with no budget. heh.
As far as the flash/no flash debate goes that would be a great topic!
Joshua would you like to give a presentation about that issue?
Still no correct answer about the header. Its not THAT hard ;) check
out little used and mis-used tags. First right answer gets a beer on
me at the next meeting.
Andrew
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 25, 2008, at 17:28, Erin Walsh <erin.walsh at dominionenterprises.com
> wrote:
> 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/20080125/8bd758f7/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Wsuug
mailing list