Posted by Chaddy2222 on 11/09/07 07:18

Els wrote:
> Chaddy2222 wrote:
>
> > BTW the main reason for doing my portfolio the way I did is mainly due
> > to the fact that it's just easier and you can do more visual effects
> > for that kind of stuff in F;lash then in HTML.
>
> That's just the thing: your portfolio shows static sites. Why
> shouldn't it just be a series of images with text? There is nothing
> that Flashy effects could add to it. There is no interaction needed in
> the portfolio as far as I can see, and the visual effects are just not
> needed at all. They don't help convey your message, in fact quite the
> opposite. If you want the slideshow, use unobtrusive JavaScript so
> that a visitor without JavaScript can still browse it with regular
> links, and those with JavaScript will get the slideshow bonus. (if it
> is a bonus, but that's a matter of personal taste)
>
> Just look at it from the potential customer's point of view: he's
> blind, and is looking for someone who makes accessible websites.
> Unfortunately he can't check out your accessible work, because you hid
> it in inaccessible Flash. Tell me, does that make sense at all?
>
>
This is an interesting point, the site is aimed mainly at non
profits but still I guess that considering that some of them are
still on dial-up, due to eather cost location or other factors, it
would probably make sence to make the portfolio page an ordinary HTML
page.
--
Free Web Design Online re-launching soon @ freewebdesignonline.org

[Back to original message]