|
|
Posted by Nik Coughlin on 05/09/06 00:17
Barbara de Zoete wrote:
> On Mon, 08 May 2006 18:43:44 +0200, Michael Laplante
> <nowhereman@twilightzone.net> wrote:
>> but I love the
>> work done by this company:
>> http://www.krucible.com/
>>
>> Some samples of their sites:
>> http://www.andersoncove.ca/# -- Love the imaginative menuing system
>> used here.
>> http://www.5thwallstudio.com/ -- Uses Flash intro but it works for
>> me in keeping with the design theme.
>> http://www.inspireddevices.com/ -- Simpler site, but great visuals.
>
> I have to admit, they do look good (with all the client side stuff
> turned on). They do. If a site has to be havy on the graphics display
> (like that 5thWallStudio thing), please let it be something like
> this. Not being cinic or sarcastic. I mean it.
I'll second that, those are some very nice sites and I actually don't mind
these kind of sites for a business, because, well, if you can't view the
site you can always go elsewhere. I'd be upset though if say, Wikipedia had
a site this graphics heavy with no alt text.
> The one thing is: with next to no effort they could have made their
> sites accessible and usable for people without flash and without
> images too. Providing some alt text on the images will do soooo much
> for example.
I was just about to post the exact same thing -- those guys are obviously
*very* good designers, very talented, but I think they're ignorant. I say
that because there's no reason for them not to have made those sites more
accessible, had they been aware of that, it would be have been little or no
extra effort for them to have done so, and I doubt very much that they
deliberately made them inaccessible, so I guess they're just not aware of
it.
There are also techniques they could have used (had they used CSS instead of
tables for layout) so that they didn't have to cut their images into so many
slices, thereby reducing load time considerably and still looking exactly
the same. In fact, some of the clever stuff they've done with the layout
would have been much easier with CSS than with tables.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|