|
|
Posted by Els on 05/27/05 16:48
Travis Newbury wrote:
> dorayme wrote:
>>> I do feel everyone is way too picky when it comes to websites.
>> Yes, ok. But maybe think of it this way: one point of *this* newsgroup is to
>> chew the fact on websites.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I completely agree that the "facts" everyone says
> here. From a "one size fits all" viewpoint they are right on the
> money. Frames cause problems, using Javascript for navigation will
> make it so some people can't see you site, Flash is almost always bad.
> But I completely disagree on the philosophy behind what makes a good
> web site good. I disagree with "one size fits all".
>
> Now at the same time, I know that I am on the losing side of the
> argument. Eventually we will have a very bland generic web that
> everyone can see no matter how they view it. The lawyers of the world
> will make sure that happens. But I think it will be sad day when it
> does happen.
I don't think it will happen.
There is nothing against using Flash and JavaScript and whatever more
designers can come up with to spice up a web site. The thing that
(imo) needs to be done though, is make a site so, that if someone
doesn't have JavaScript or Flash, at least the information is still
available.
JavaScript menus are no problem, if they have a solid <a href=".."> as
basis. I don't know anything about Flash, but I don't think it's
impossible to have an alternative content access in case Flash is
disabled or not installed.
One size fits all, to me means that you can serve fancy Flash content
to perhaps the majority, whilst not forgetting the minority, simply by
adding a link to a simple (bland if you like) HTML page.
Even in a large theme park with rollercoasters, aimed mainly at
teenagers, adolescents and adults, they always have a simple
roundabout for the little ones on the premises :-)
--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|