Dreamweaver Progress...

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Montgomery BOO...URNS, Jul 28, 2005.

  1. Okay folks, so far, so good...

    I have an ongoing process of building my own website using Dreamweaver and
    so far I like the results. After getting further criticism from the likes
    of this forum and other newsgroups, I have been able to build a "not so
    heavy"/"no frills" website.

    http://users.rcn.com/solitude439

    Take a look and let me know what you guys think and maybe give me some
    suggestions as to what and where I can go with the over all design for this
    site. Dreamweaver expert criticism is always welcome.

    Thanks again.


    --
    ==_DC_==
    Montgomery BOO...URNS, Jul 28, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Montgomery BOO...URNS wrote:

    > http://users.rcn.com/solitude439
    >
    > Take a look and let me know what you guys think


    Absolute positioning is a powerful tool, but its very easy to create
    problems with it. If you don't know the height of an element, don't try to
    position something below it:

    http://dorward.me.uk/tmp/absolute-positioning.png (indexed to 25 colours to
    keep the file size down, so there is some nasty dithering there too)

    You have machine detectable syntax errors:
    http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http://users.rcn.com/solitude439/

    You abuse tables for layout:
    http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Tableless_layouts

    You use pixels for font sizes:
    http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=UsingPixels

    You use deprecated markup (<center>, <font>, bgcolor, text, etc). If its
    marked with a D it should be avoided:
    http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/index/elements.html
    http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/index/attributes.html

    You have such nonsense as:
    <b> </b> - a bold space
    and
    <p>&nbsp;</p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p> - two "paragraphs", each of which consists solely of a
    non-breaking space.

    You have element ids which give no indication as to what the element is:
    id="Layer2"
    - a maintenance nightmare.

    "This site is property of 439 Communications. All Rights Reserved. For More
    Information, please check out our Privacy Policy."
    - Why would I look in your privacy policy to find copyright information? And
    why isn't there a link there?

    "Return" - return to what?

    Your "list of services" is a paragraph with line breaks between overly
    capitalised job types - not a list.

    Your affiliate logos are huge (in file size).



    --
    David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
    Home is where the ~/.bashrc is
    David Dorward, Jul 28, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Montgomery BOO...URNS

    Rincewind Guest

    On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:46:27 +0100, David Dorward wrote:

    > Montgomery BOO...URNS wrote:
    >
    >> http://users.rcn.com/solitude439
    >>
    >> Take a look and let me know what you guys think

    >
    > Absolute positioning is a powerful tool, but its very easy to create
    > problems with it. If you don't know the height of an element, don't try to
    > position something below it:

    <snip>

    And you seem to assume that everyone who views your page does it on a
    17inch monitor. So it looks even worse on a smaller screen.
    Rincewind, Jul 28, 2005
    #3
  4. Montgomery BOO...URNS wrote:
    > Okay folks, so far, so good...
    > I have an ongoing process of building my own website using Dreamweaver and
    > so far I like the results. After getting further criticism from the likes
    > of this forum and other newsgroups, I have been able to build a "not so
    > heavy"/"no frills" website.


    Is that what you wanted or is that what you were told you should do by
    this group?

    > http://users.rcn.com/solitude439


    You are right, no frills at all.

    > Take a look and let me know what you guys think and maybe give me some
    > suggestions as to what and where I can go with the over all design for this
    > site. Dreamweaver expert criticism is always welcome.


    I personally like the "frills" so if I were a customer, I would see
    this site, and say to myself "What a boring website. This compnay has
    nothing to offer me..." And I would hit google to find your
    competition.

    Of course, there are those that would do the exact opposite too. So you
    have to find what works best for you.

    --
    -=tn=-
    Travis Newbury, Jul 28, 2005
    #4
  5. Montgomery BOO...URNS

    rf Guest

    Rincewind wrote:

    > And you seem to assume that everyone who views your page does it on a
    > 17inch monitor. So it looks even worse on a smaller screen.


    Er, what would the physical size of the monitor in inches have to do with
    anything?

    Surely a more appropriate dimension to consider would be the number of
    pixels the browsers viewport occupies.

    Hint: One of my computer "monitors" is ten feet wide. Yes, feet. 120 inches.
    Three metres. However it is quite old and only shines 800x600 pixels on the
    lounge room wall.

    Message to the OP (if you audit alt.html as well as those other crossposted
    groups which my ISP does not carry):

    On the above monitor your navigation is below the fold and so may well be
    missed by the casual visitor.

    Resize *your* browser window to 800x600 and look. No navigaion, just a
    couple of contact links. Ho hum... moves on to the next site, having not
    bothered to scroll down.

    Cheers
    Richard.
    rf, Jul 28, 2005
    #5
  6. Montgomery BOO...URNS

    cosmic foo Guest

    "Montgomery BOO...URNS" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Okay folks, so far, so good...
    >
    > I have an ongoing process of building my own website using Dreamweaver and
    > so far I like the results. After getting further criticism from the likes
    > of this forum and other newsgroups, I have been able to build a "not so
    > heavy"/"no frills" website.
    >
    > http://users.rcn.com/solitude439
    >
    > Take a look and let me know what you guys think and maybe give me some
    > suggestions as to what and where I can go with the over all design for

    this
    > site. Dreamweaver expert criticism is always welcome.
    >
    > Thanks again.
    >
    >
    > --
    > ==_DC_==
    >
    >


    in one word, breathtaking.
    Dreamweaver rules!
    cosmic foo, Jul 28, 2005
    #6
  7. Montgomery BOO...URNS

    Guest

    Rincewind wrote:
    > On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:46:27 +0100, David Dorward wrote:
    >
    > > Montgomery BOO...URNS wrote:
    > >
    > >> http://users.rcn.com/solitude439
    > >>
    > >> Take a look and let me know what you guys think

    > >
    > > Absolute positioning is a powerful tool, but its very easy to create
    > > problems with it. If you don't know the height of an element, don't try to
    > > position something below it:

    > <snip>
    >
    > And you seem to assume that everyone who views your page does it on a
    > 17inch monitor. So it looks even worse on a smaller screen.


    What's monitor size got to do with it? The problem is with screen
    pixel dimension, not monitor size.

    --
    Hywel
    , Jul 28, 2005
    #7
  8. Montgomery BOO...URNS

    Guest

    You really are stage-diving into the killfiles, aren't you.
    , Jul 28, 2005
    #8
  9. "rf" <@invalid.com> wrote in message
    news:mF3Ge.65205$...
    > Rincewind wrote:
    >
    >> And you seem to assume that everyone who views your page does it on a
    >> 17inch monitor. So it looks even worse on a smaller screen.

    >
    > Er, what would the physical size of the monitor in inches have to do with
    > anything?
    >
    > Surely a more appropriate dimension to consider would be the number of
    > pixels the browsers viewport occupies.
    >
    > Hint: One of my computer "monitors" is ten feet wide. Yes, feet. 120
    > inches.
    > Three metres. However it is quite old and only shines 800x600 pixels on
    > the
    > lounge room wall.
    >
    > Message to the OP (if you audit alt.html as well as those other
    > crossposted
    > groups which my ISP does not carry):
    >
    > On the above monitor your navigation is below the fold and so may well be
    > missed by the casual visitor.
    >
    > Resize *your* browser window to 800x600 and look. No navigaion, just a
    > couple of contact links. Ho hum... moves on to the next site, having not
    > bothered to scroll down.


    I have taken all of that into consideration. The monitor resolution is very
    important when it comes to web design.

    Thanks.


    --
    ==_DC_==
    Montgomery BOO...URNS, Jul 29, 2005
    #9
  10. "Travis Newbury" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Montgomery BOO...URNS wrote:
    >> Okay folks, so far, so good...
    >> I have an ongoing process of building my own website using Dreamweaver
    >> and
    >> so far I like the results. After getting further criticism from the
    >> likes
    >> of this forum and other newsgroups, I have been able to build a "not so
    >> heavy"/"no frills" website.

    >
    > Is that what you wanted or is that what you were told you should do by
    > this group?
    >
    >> http://users.rcn.com/solitude439

    >
    > You are right, no frills at all.
    >
    >> Take a look and let me know what you guys think and maybe give me some
    >> suggestions as to what and where I can go with the over all design for
    >> this
    >> site. Dreamweaver expert criticism is always welcome.

    >
    > I personally like the "frills" so if I were a customer, I would see
    > this site, and say to myself "What a boring website. This compnay has
    > nothing to offer me..." And I would hit google to find your
    > competition.


    Basically, this is my first website using Dreamweaver. Now, I have been
    told that I should put Dreamweaver aside for the time being and concentrate
    on coding using CSS which I will definitely take into consideration (I
    definitely want to learn CSS coding) but I do want to use Dreamweaver
    because you never know when a client will specifically tell me that they
    want their site built using DW. It happens, I've been in the business, I
    know!!

    >
    > Of course, there are those that would do the exact opposite too. So you
    > have to find what works best for you.


    The current projects that I'm working on were apportioned by a team of
    people who took notice to my graphic style and how I put an artistic twist
    to my design for websites, so I'm not settling on keeping this particular
    web site the way it is by no means. I just wanted to get my feet wet using
    DW and I wanted to see where I can go once I get a basic page up and
    running.

    Thanks for all of your input. I will take it all with me.


    --
    ==_DC_==
    Montgomery BOO...URNS, Jul 29, 2005
    #10
  11. Montgomery BOO...URNS

    Neredbojias Guest

    With neither quill nor qualm, Montgomery BOO...URNS quothed:

    > I have taken all of that into consideration. The monitor resolution is very
    > important when it comes to web design.


    It shouldn't be.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
    Neredbojias, Jul 29, 2005
    #11
  12. Montgomery BOO...URNS

    rf Guest

    Montgomery BOO...URNS wrote:

    > I have taken all of that into consideration. The monitor resolution is

    very
    > important when it comes to web design.


    If resolution is so important then why is your menu not visible on my
    800x600 monitor unless I scroll down?

    And when I *do* scroll down, why is it all the way over to the right (unlike
    the rest of the content), in fact extending outside the right of the
    viewport causing an unneeded horizontal scrollbar?

    <aside>
    Oh my. I just looked inside one of your pages. You claim (in the doctype) to
    be XHTML strict. If so then why is all that deprecated stuff in there? Did
    you let dreamweaver produce that? You really should ditch all that and use
    CSS for presentational issues.
    </aside>

    Cheers
    Richard.
    rf, Jul 29, 2005
    #12
  13. Montgomery BOO...URNS wrote:
    > Basically, this is my first website using Dreamweaver. Now, I have been
    > told that I should put Dreamweaver aside for the time being and concentrate
    > on coding using CSS which I will definitely take into consideration (I
    > definitely want to learn CSS coding) but I do want to use Dreamweaver
    > because you never know when a client will specifically tell me that they
    > want their site built using DW. It happens, I've been in the business, I
    > know!!


    Why would they care that the site is built with Dreamweaver? How would
    they even know unless you tell them.

    I think the important thing to remember is Dreamweaver is an awesome
    tool for developing websites. But without a knopwledge of HTML and
    CSS, it is a dangerous tool. It will let you do thing that you
    probalby should not do. And unless you know what the code does, that
    can get you into some trouble.

    --
    -=tn=-
    Travis Newbury, Jul 29, 2005
    #13
  14. wrote:

    > You really are stage-diving into the killfiles, aren't you.
    >

    Be optimistic, maybe this was an attempt at sarcasm! :)

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Jul 31, 2005
    #14
  15. Montgomery BOO...URNS

    web_design Guest

    "David Dorward" <> wrote in message
    news:dc9v0u$nl0$1$...
    > Montgomery BOO...URNS wrote:
    >
    > You have such nonsense as:
    > <b> </b> - a bold space
    > and
    > <p>&nbsp;</p>
    > <p>&nbsp;</p> - two "paragraphs", each of which consists solely of a
    > non-breaking space.


    That is Dreamweaver WYSIWYG generated...
    web_design, Aug 7, 2005
    #15
  16. On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 01:43:53 -0400, web_design
    <> wrote:

    >
    > "David Dorward" <> wrote in message
    > news:dc9v0u$nl0$1$...
    >> Montgomery BOO...URNS wrote:
    >>
    >> You have such nonsense as:
    >> <b> </b> - a bold space
    >> and
    >> <p>&nbsp;</p>
    >> <p>&nbsp;</p> - two "paragraphs", each of which consists solely of a
    >> non-breaking space.

    >
    > That is Dreamweaver WYSIWYG generated...
    >


    So? Author should take it out before uploading. Using Dreamweaver is not the
    best of ideas if the author is not capable of correcting the code by hand.



    --
    ,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
    | weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
    | webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
    |zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
    `-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
    Barbara de Zoete, Aug 7, 2005
    #16
  17. Montgomery BOO...URNS

    Big Bill Guest

    On Sun, 07 Aug 2005 09:46:08 +0200, "Barbara de Zoete"
    <> wrote:

    >On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 01:43:53 -0400, web_design
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "David Dorward" <> wrote in message
    >> news:dc9v0u$nl0$1$...
    >>> Montgomery BOO...URNS wrote:
    >>>
    >>> You have such nonsense as:
    >>> <b> </b> - a bold space
    >>> and
    >>> <p>&nbsp;</p>
    >>> <p>&nbsp;</p> - two "paragraphs", each of which consists solely of a
    >>> non-breaking space.

    >>
    >> That is Dreamweaver WYSIWYG generated...
    >>

    >
    >So? Author should take it out before uploading. Using Dreamweaver is not the
    >best of ideas if the author is not capable of correcting the code by hand.


    Everybody breathe for Barbara!

    BB
    --
    www.kruse.co.uk/
    Elvis does my seo
    --
    Big Bill, Aug 7, 2005
    #17
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Douglas Gage

    Visual Studio .Net vs Dreamweaver

    Douglas Gage, Jan 13, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    527
    Rod Snyder
    Jan 19, 2004
  2. prince -=nore=-
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    427
    prince -=nore=-
    Jul 24, 2003
  3. Charlie Zhang
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,237
    Paul Lutus
    Aug 16, 2004
  4. Jason
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    8,464
    Toby Inkster
    Jan 9, 2005
  5. Montgomery BOO...URNS

    Dreamweaver Progress...

    Montgomery BOO...URNS, Jul 28, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    359
    Montgomery BOO...URNS
    Jul 29, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page