|
|
Posted by Jonathan N. Little on 07/06/06 23:29
jojo wrote:
> Chris Tomlinson wrote:
>
>>> I found 6 externel JavaScript on this Site: 3 from maps.google.com, 2
>>> from www.assoc-amazon.co.uk and one from pageat2.googlesyndication.com.
>>> And there are at least 9 <script>-Tags in your main sitte and another
>>> one in the iframe.
>>
>> We're not sure what you're saying there -- is there some reason we
>> shouldn't be using JS at all?
>>
> Yes, there is... About 15% of all users have swithed it off (I know you
> do not belive this...). But this was not my point. I just wanted to
> disprove your statement:
>> What JS are you referring to? The bulk of the JS is the Google Maps
>> tracking,
>> which I assure you cannot be done with HTML & CSS.
>
We have another Luigi here, asks questions but really does not want any
answers. Screw the 1% 15% JavaScript enabled debate, what percentage of
people do you think have access to broadband? 2-3MB pages are just way
too much and are not *cutting-edge* web design but it is just ... (well
I'll be kind) misguided and naive. If you want to produce an interactive
multimedia show then send me a CD not a link on a webpage. I build
commerce sites and yes folks like them to be visually attractive, but
what most people want when they shop online is convenience. Simple,
clear and fast otherwise they'd hop in the car and go shopping.
>> There is a balance here. Some people like the initial way the site
>> brings you to the street, visually and audibly. Take away the audio
>> and you lose one of the senses that you couldn't avoid on the street.
>> Do you wear earplugs when shopping?
>
Did you ever consider that the person may be using a public computer? I
manage computers at our county libraries, noise can be an issue.
> No, but my computer is connected with my stereo... and I always listen
> to music when I surf the Internet.
>
> <snip>
>
>>> Your site still needs a lot of time to load with broadband
>>> connections. (especially the sound)
>>
>> The sound portion is 100k. Again, the site is designed
>> for/recommended for broadband connections.
>>
>
> I have broadband (DSL 2000).
>
>>> I just have to switch off JavaScript and - bingo, i can right click
>>> on the images...
>>
>> It is just a deterrant. The images are digitally watermarked.
No it is an annoyance. "Digitally watermarked" really means nothing to
the pilferer unless they have the Digimarc plugin and professional
graphic software. If you think the watermark is going to be a deterrent
better think again. As an artist I am will aware if copyright and
images and other than publishing your copyright statement the only way
to real way to protect your images is don't publish them on the web. Oh,
you may have found a third, make them so frigging big that the potential
pilferer gives up and leaves your site before the images are even
download to their cache!
>
> So why don't you just leave out the JS than? The alert box is really
> annoying!
--
Take care,
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|