Link to another website, in an iframe, to a spot on page

Discussion in 'HTML' started by mjones, Aug 6, 2007.

  1. mjones

    mjones Guest

    Hi All,

    Here's what I have, but it doesn't jump down to the spot on the page.

    <a href="#" onclick="window.open('http://www.energywellnessstudies.com?
    url=home/faculty.asp#DeMarco',
    'DeMarco','toolbar=yes,location=yes,status=no,menubar=yes,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,width=800,height=600')">Dr.
    Carolyn DeMarco</a>

    The page it's going to has <a name="DeMarco"></a> where I want to jump
    to. This name tag works within the page because I use it to jump from
    her top picture down to her detail.

    If you need it, the code is on the page www.devitawellness.com/pub/electpoll.asp.

    Any help to make this work would be appreciated.

    Thanks,

    Michele
     
    mjones, Aug 6, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. mjones wrote:

    > If you need it, the code is on the page
    > www.devitawellness.com/pub/electpoll.asp.


    "The document you are looking for is missing. Click HOME at the top to
    return to the DeVita Wellness website.

    ©2005 DeVita Wellness Institute of Living and Learning"

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Aug 6, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. mjones

    mjones Guest

    On Aug 6, 11:07 am, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
    <> wrote:
    > mjones wrote:
    > > If you need it, the code is on the page
    > >www.devitawellness.com/pub/electpoll.asp.

    >
    > "The document you are looking for is missing. Click HOME at the top to
    > return to the DeVita Wellness website.
    >
    > ©2005 DeVita Wellness Institute of Living and Learning"
    >
    > --
    > -bts
    > -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck


    I appologize; it's an iframe. This will work -
    http://www.devitawellness.com/?url=/pub/elecpoll.asp.
     
    mjones, Aug 6, 2007
    #3
  4. mjones wrote:

    > "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
    >> mjones wrote:
    >>> If you need it, the code is on the page
    >>>www.devitawellness.com/pub/electpoll.asp.

    >>
    >> "The document you are looking for is missing. Click HOME at the top to
    >> return to the DeVita Wellness website.
    >>
    >> ©2005 DeVita Wellness Institute of Living and Learning"

    >
    > I appologize; it's an iframe. This will work -
    > http://www.devitawellness.com/?url=/pub/elecpoll.asp.


    [Please don't include the ending period with URLs; some newsreaders
    can't separate that from the clickable link (though not mine). Thanks.]

    "<!--WARNING :DO NOT USE SCRICT.DTD OTHERWISE THE IFRAME WILL DISPLAY
    INCORRECTLY IN FIREFOX-->"
    ...probably not if you wrote it correctly? (I don't use iframes)

    There are plenty of errors:
    <http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.devitawellness.com%2F%3Furl%3D%2Fpub%2Felecpoll.asp>

    Your meta keyword stuffing will get you penalties. Google and the others
    stopped reading keywords sometime in the last millenium, due to abuse.
    It is suggested that if the keywords do not appear in the content, you
    may be dropped from indexing, though only Google knows its complete rule
    set.

    With the JavaScript stripped by my corporate firewall, your page is
    nothing more than a heading and a large, long, empty blue box.
    Approximately ~10% of your visitors will have JavaScript disabled or
    stripped. You might as well turn your web server off for .. the month of
    August .. every year.

    After seeing the absurd (sorry) complexity of this layout - overused
    JavaScript, mix of HTML 4.01 and HTML 3.2 - I believe I will bow out
    trying to figure out your problem.

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Aug 6, 2007
    #4
  5. mjones

    mjones Guest

    On Aug 6, 11:34 am, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
    <> wrote:
    > mjones wrote:
    > > "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
    > >> mjones wrote:
    > >>> If you need it, the code is on the page
    > >>>www.devitawellness.com/pub/electpoll.asp.

    >
    > >> "The document you are looking for is missing. Click HOME at the top to
    > >> return to the DeVita Wellness website.

    >
    > >> ©2005 DeVita Wellness Institute of Living and Learning"

    >
    > > I appologize; it's an iframe. This will work -
    > >http://www.devitawellness.com/?url=/pub/elecpoll.asp.

    >
    > [Please don't include the ending period with URLs; some newsreaders
    > can't separate that from the clickable link (though not mine). Thanks.]
    >
    > "<!--WARNING :DO NOT USE SCRICT.DTD OTHERWISE THE IFRAME WILL DISPLAY
    > INCORRECTLY IN FIREFOX-->"
    > ..probably not if you wrote it correctly? (I don't use iframes)
    >
    > There are plenty of errors:
    > <http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.devitawe...>
    >
    > Your meta keyword stuffing will get you penalties. Google and the others
    > stopped reading keywords sometime in the last millenium, due to abuse.
    > It is suggested that if the keywords do not appear in the content, you
    > may be dropped from indexing, though only Google knows its complete rule
    > set.
    >
    > With the JavaScript stripped by my corporate firewall, your page is
    > nothing more than a heading and a large, long, empty blue box.
    > Approximately ~10% of your visitors will have JavaScript disabled or
    > stripped. You might as well turn your web server off for .. the month of
    > August .. every year.
    >
    > After seeing the absurd (sorry) complexity of this layout - overused
    > JavaScript, mix of HTML 4.01 and HTML 3.2 - I believe I will bow out
    > trying to figure out your problem.
    >
    > --
    > -bts
    > -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck


    Thank you for your frank opinion. This was an early website I did
    when I just started learning html and a 'friend' helped me with it.
    It turns out he wasn't such a friend after all - he was just trying to
    get me to go out with him. But now I'm stuck with the code on four
    websites and doing my best to carry on without him.

    I ran it though w3.org's validator and you're right. It's a mess.

    Again, thanks for trying.
     
    mjones, Aug 6, 2007
    #5
  6. mjones

    mjones Guest

    On Aug 6, 11:44 am, mjones <> wrote:
    > On Aug 6, 11:34 am, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > <> wrote:
    > > mjones wrote:
    > > > "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
    > > >> mjones wrote:
    > > >>> If you need it, the code is on the page
    > > >>>www.devitawellness.com/pub/electpoll.asp.

    >
    > > >> "The document you are looking for is missing. Click HOME at the top to
    > > >> return to the DeVita Wellness website.

    >
    > > >> ©2005 DeVita Wellness Institute of Living and Learning"

    >
    > > > I appologize; it's an iframe. This will work -
    > > >http://www.devitawellness.com/?url=/pub/elecpoll.asp.

    >
    > > [Please don't include the ending period with URLs; some newsreaders
    > > can't separate that from the clickable link (though not mine). Thanks.]

    >
    > > "<!--WARNING :DO NOT USE SCRICT.DTD OTHERWISE THE IFRAME WILL DISPLAY
    > > INCORRECTLY IN FIREFOX-->"
    > > ..probably not if you wrote it correctly? (I don't use iframes)

    >
    > > There are plenty of errors:
    > > <http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.devitawe...>

    >
    > > Your meta keyword stuffing will get you penalties. Google and the others
    > > stopped reading keywords sometime in the last millenium, due to abuse.
    > > It is suggested that if the keywords do not appear in the content, you
    > > may be dropped from indexing, though only Google knows its complete rule
    > > set.

    >
    > > With the JavaScript stripped by my corporate firewall, your page is
    > > nothing more than a heading and a large, long, empty blue box.
    > > Approximately ~10% of your visitors will have JavaScript disabled or
    > > stripped. You might as well turn your web server off for .. the month of
    > > August .. every year.

    >
    > > After seeing the absurd (sorry) complexity of this layout - overused
    > > JavaScript, mix of HTML 4.01 and HTML 3.2 - I believe I will bow out
    > > trying to figure out your problem.

    >
    > > --
    > > -bts
    > > -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

    >
    > Thank you for your frank opinion. This was an early website I did
    > when I just started learning html and a 'friend' helped me with it.
    > It turns out he wasn't such a friend after all - he was just trying to
    > get me to go out with him. But now I'm stuck with the code on four
    > websites and doing my best to carry on without him.
    >
    > I ran it though w3.org's validator and you're right. It's a mess.
    >
    > Again, thanks for trying.- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Hi again,

    I was able to validate the code. Is there any way you can possibly
    look at it again? Please.
     
    mjones, Aug 6, 2007
    #6
  7. mjones wrote:

    > I was able to validate the code. Is there any way you can possibly
    > look at it again? Please.


    Ok, that's a start. You do have some CSS errors, too.

    <http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.devitawellness.com%2F%3Furl%3D%2Fpub%2Felecpoll.asp>

    The resulting page, though, is still a large empty blue box "for the
    month of August"... :)

    Are you: http://www.quality-computing.com/ ?
    ...a large empty *dark* blue box. That site has the same problems. What
    do you use to generate these pages? They are so intense they can't
    possibly be hand-coded...

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Aug 6, 2007
    #7
  8. mjones

    mjones Guest

    On Aug 6, 1:56 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
    <> wrote:
    > mjones wrote:
    > > I was able to validate the code. Is there any way you can possibly
    > > look at it again? Please.

    >
    > Ok, that's a start. You do have some CSS errors, too.
    >
    > <http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dev...>
    >
    > The resulting page, though, is still a large empty blue box "for the
    > month of August"... :)
    >
    > Are you: http://www.quality-computing.com/?
    > ..a large empty *dark* blue box. That site has the same problems. What
    > do you use to generate these pages? They are so intense they can't
    > possibly be hand-coded...
    >
    > --
    > -bts
    > -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck


    Yes, I'm Quality Computing. Yes, same basic coding. I don't need to
    tell you that Project Management is my thing, not html. I am getting
    somewhat better with time (www.minusforty.ca), but still have a
    considerable way to go. Also, the quality standard is set by the
    client - how much time (read money) they give me to spend on it. It's
    been my experience that once they see it on their screen, that's all
    they care. My clients visualize the page as being typed in Word. On
    the other hand, it's partly me learning on the job so to speak, too.
    I really enjoy the design and wording aspects, but I'm not a
    programmer, and prefer to employ programmers for web development
    projects.

    Yes, hand coded if I understand what you mean. I use HomeSite, and
    because I type fast, I generally type the code I remember or just
    TopStyle Lite (in HomeSite) to pick options.

    I'm not sure what you mean by a 'large empty *dark* blue box". This
    website works in IE6, IE7 and pretty much in FireFox, has been for
    several years, i.e. www.devitawellness.com works. Similarly, so does
    www.energywellnessstudies.com. And the 'month of August'? Whatever
    do you mean? It sounds like you're into the Tetigi software (the
    webstats stuff) from the bottom of the pages. What browser do you
    use?

    Thanks for pointing me to the CSS validator. It will be useful
    because I'm not sure about valid options at times. It's one thing
    that makes me nuts. In HomeSite, when you right click a tag to edit
    it and choose a StyleSheet style, you get TopStyle Lite. Then you
    pick your styles (like font-style), but more often than not the styles
    do nothing. It would be good if only the styles that are valid for
    that tag will show in the list. I think I have to pick the right
    thing from the Style Inspector drop down (I've got CSS2), but I'm not
    sure hope that works. I just added that to my very long to do list.

    Thanks again and sorry for being so green at this. Maybe I can help
    you with project management sometime; I teach it.

    Michele
     
    mjones, Aug 6, 2007
    #8
  9. mjones

    John Hosking Guest

    mjones wrote:
    > On Aug 6, 1:56 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:


    >> The resulting page, though, is still a large empty blue box "for the
    >> month of August"... :)
    >>
    >> Are you: http://www.quality-computing.com/?
    >> ..a large empty *dark* blue box. That site has the same problems.


    >
    > I'm not sure what you mean by a 'large empty *dark* blue box". This
    > website works in IE6, IE7 and pretty much in FireFox, has been for
    > several years, i.e. www.devitawellness.com works. Similarly, so does
    > www.energywellnessstudies.com. And the 'month of August'? Whatever
    > do you mean? It sounds like you're into the Tetigi software (the
    > webstats stuff) from the bottom of the pages. What browser do you
    > use?


    Beauregard tends to travel unencumbered by JavaScript. With my JS turned
    off I see vast tracts of empty space on (the default pages of) both the
    sites mentioned. Doesn't matter what browser.


    --
    John
    Pondering the value of the UIP: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    John Hosking, Aug 6, 2007
    #9
  10. mjones

    mjones Guest

    On Aug 6, 2:47 pm, John Hosking <>
    wrote:
    > mjones wrote:
    > > On Aug 6, 1:56 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
    > >> The resulting page, though, is still a large empty blue box "for the
    > >> month of August"... :)

    >
    > >> Are you: http://www.quality-computing.com/?
    > >> ..a large empty *dark* blue box. That site has the same problems.

    >
    > > I'm not sure what you mean by a 'large empty *dark* blue box". This
    > > website works in IE6, IE7 and pretty much in FireFox, has been for
    > > several years, i.e.www.devitawellness.comworks. Similarly, so does
    > >www.energywellnessstudies.com. And the 'month of August'? Whatever
    > > do you mean? It sounds like you're into the Tetigi software (the
    > > webstats stuff) from the bottom of the pages. What browser do you
    > > use?

    >
    > Beauregard tends to travel unencumbered by JavaScript. With my JS turned
    > off I see vast tracts of empty space on (the default pages of) both the
    > sites mentioned. Doesn't matter what browser.
    >
    > --
    > John
    > Pondering the value of the UIP:http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html


    Our user stats show 0.39% with Java disabled and 0.77% with JavaScript
    disabled. I guess we're okay then. Whew.

    We're getting 42% IE7, 42% IE6 and 15% Mozilla/Netscape5 - all English
    (US and Canada). Not a fancy userbase.

    My original question was, from this page - http://www.devitawellness.com/?url=/pub/elecpoll.asp
    (see link below), why doesn't the result jump down to the name
    DeMarco?

    <a href="#" onclick="window.open('http://
    www.energywellnessstudies.com?
    url=home/faculty.asp#DeMarco',
    'DeMarco','toolbar=yes,location=yes,status=no,menubar=yes,scrollbars=yes,re­
    sizable=yes,width=800,height=600')">Dr.
    Carolyn DeMarco</a>

    I hope someone can help now that I've validated the code.

    Thanks again all,

    Michele
     
    mjones, Aug 6, 2007
    #10
  11. On 2007-08-06, mjones wrote:
    > On Aug 6, 2:47 pm, John Hosking <>
    > wrote:

    ....
    >> Beauregard tends to travel unencumbered by JavaScript. With my JS turned
    >> off I see vast tracts of empty space on (the default pages of) both the
    >> sites mentioned. Doesn't matter what browser.

    >
    > Our user stats show 0.39% with Java disabled and 0.77% with JavaScript
    > disabled. I guess we're okay then.


    No, it means that a lot of people don't bother returning to your
    site.

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
     
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Aug 6, 2007
    #11
  12. mjones

    mjones Guest

    On Aug 6, 5:02 pm, "Chris F.A. Johnson" <> wrote:
    > On 2007-08-06, mjones wrote:
    > > On Aug 6, 2:47 pm, John Hosking <>
    > > wrote:

    > ...
    > >> Beauregard tends to travel unencumbered by JavaScript. With my JS turned
    > >> off I see vast tracts of empty space on (the default pages of) both the
    > >> sites mentioned. Doesn't matter what browser.

    >
    > > Our user stats show 0.39% with Java disabled and 0.77% with JavaScript
    > > disabled. I guess we're okay then.

    >
    > No, it means that a lot of people don't bother returning to your
    > site.
    >
    > --
    > Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
    > ===================================================================
    > Author:
    > Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)


    How do I go about fixing it? Are you suggesting that I don't use
    Javascript?

    We're getting 47% returning visitors. For the client's industry, I'm
    happy with that.
     
    mjones, Aug 6, 2007
    #12
  13. mjones wrote:

    > Yes, hand coded if I understand what you mean. I use HomeSite, and
    > because I type fast, I generally type the code I remember or just
    > TopStyle Lite (in HomeSite) to pick options.


    Your sites are not hand-coded. Hand-coding is when you type everything
    in the "source" with your keyboard, not using a WYSIWYMG product such as
    HoseSite. Using a simple text editor. Notepad, for example (though I use
    a much better one than that).

    > I'm not sure what you mean by a 'large empty *dark* blue box". This


    My JavaScript is off. Turn yours off to see what I mean. Approximately
    10% of your visitors will have JavaScript off/disabled/stripped and will
    see no content in that large blue box. IOW, your pages are blank except
    for the header at the top.

    > website works in IE6, IE7 and pretty much in FireFox, has been for
    > several years, i.e. www.devitawellness.com works. Similarly, so does
    > www.energywellnessstudies.com. And the 'month of August'? Whatever
    > do you mean? It sounds like you're into the Tetigi software (the
    > webstats stuff) from the bottom of the pages. What browser do you
    > use?


    In a previous post, I said relying on JavaScript for important stuff
    (like menus and content) is like turning your web server off for a month
    every year. (Like August)

    Doesn't matter what browser. I've looked at your sites with Firefox,
    Opera, and Safari and they are the same.

    Try OffByOne sometime; http://offbyone.com/

    > Thanks for pointing me to the CSS validator. It will be useful
    > because I'm not sure about valid options at times. It's one thing
    > that makes me nuts. In HomeSite, when you right click a tag to edit
    > it and choose a StyleSheet style, you get TopStyle Lite. Then you
    > pick your styles (like font-style), but more often than not the styles
    > do nothing. It would be good if only the styles that are valid for
    > that tag will show in the list. I think I have to pick the right
    > thing from the Style Inspector drop down (I've got CSS2), but I'm not
    > sure hope that works. I just added that to my very long to do list.


    I looked at TopStyle several years ago. I can type the stuff a lot
    faster than using it to pick things...

    > Thanks again and sorry for being so green at this. Maybe I can help
    > you with project management sometime; I teach it.


    <lol> No, I'm retired now...

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Aug 6, 2007
    #13
  14. mjones wrote:

    > Our user stats show 0.39% with Java disabled and 0.77% with JavaScript
    > disabled. I guess we're okay then. Whew.


    You need to worry. Do you know that the Googlebot won't see your content
    either? It does not read and execute JavaScript.

    Byebye search engines...

    > We're getting 42% IE7, 42% IE6 and 15% Mozilla/Netscape5 - all
    > English (US and Canada). Not a fancy userbase.


    If your stats really say 15% Moz/Netscape5, then I wouldn't trust them
    for percentage of JavaScript either.

    I haven't seen Netscape 5 or less at my sites for months.

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Aug 6, 2007
    #14
  15. On 2007-08-06, mjones wrote:
    > On Aug 6, 5:02 pm, "Chris F.A. Johnson" <> wrote:
    >> On 2007-08-06, mjones wrote:
    >> > On Aug 6, 2:47 pm, John Hosking <>
    >> > wrote:

    >> ...
    >> >> Beauregard tends to travel unencumbered by JavaScript. With my JS turned
    >> >> off I see vast tracts of empty space on (the default pages of) both the
    >> >> sites mentioned. Doesn't matter what browser.

    >>
    >> > Our user stats show 0.39% with Java disabled and 0.77% with JavaScript
    >> > disabled. I guess we're okay then.

    >>
    >> No, it means that a lot of people don't bother returning to your
    >> site.

    >
    > How do I go about fixing it? Are you suggesting that I don't use
    > Javascript?


    Exactly!

    > We're getting 47% returning visitors. For the client's industry, I'm
    > happy with that.


    Think how much more it would be without JS.

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
     
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Aug 6, 2007
    #15
  16. mjones

    mjones Guest

    On Aug 6, 6:10 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
    <> wrote:
    > mjones wrote:
    > > Our user stats show 0.39% with Java disabled and 0.77% with JavaScript
    > > disabled. I guess we're okay then. Whew.

    >
    > You need to worry. Do you know that the Googlebot won't see your content
    > either? It does not read and execute JavaScript.
    >
    > Byebye search engines...
    >
    > > We're getting 42% IE7, 42% IE6 and 15% Mozilla/Netscape5 - all
    > > English (US and Canada). Not a fancy userbase.

    >
    > If your stats really say 15% Moz/Netscape5, then I wouldn't trust them
    > for percentage of JavaScript either.
    >
    > I haven't seen Netscape 5 or less at my sites for months.
    >
    > --
    > -bts
    > -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck


    I think the 15% is really Firefox (and Netscape) because Firefox is
    not in the list and I know there are Firefox users. So given that, I
    feel I can still trust the stats.

    I see what you mean about Javascript, but as I mentioned above, our
    user stats show 0.39% Java disabled and 0.77 JavaScript disabled.
    These are not significant enough numbers (bye bye only a few days each
    year) to make me throw out months of work and start again. I'm sure
    my client will agree.

    Also, one of my other clients is Sun Microsystems. I think they'd
    like me to use their product.

    Also, I wouldn't know how to go about redesigning the menuing system
    in html. I think these sites are too big for that. I last site I
    made I used a menu application called Infinite Menus. After quite a
    bit of back and forth with them, I did get it to work
    (www.minusforty.ca). I believe that BestBuy uses this one, too, but
    they're not using iframes and (well, mine works better).

    I do see your point though about Javascript, but I hope you can see
    mine, too, and still hope you can help with the link to a particular
    spot in a page.

    Thanks for your time and interesting points,

    Michele
     
    mjones, Aug 6, 2007
    #16
  17. mjones wrote:

    > I see what you mean about Javascript, but as I mentioned above, our
    > user stats show 0.39% Java disabled and 0.77 JavaScript disabled.
    > These are not significant enough numbers (bye bye only a few days each
    > year) to make me throw out months of work and start again. I'm sure
    > my client will agree.


    You missed the part about the search engines not reading and executing
    JavaScript. To them, it's a blank page(s). Your content will never be
    indexed by Google and the others. How will people find you?

    > Also, one of my other clients is Sun Microsystems. I think they'd
    > like me to use their product.


    What product is that?

    > Also, I wouldn't know how to go about redesigning the menuing system
    > in html. I think these sites are too big for that.


    Our opinions differ on that. <g>

    > I last site I
    > made I used a menu application called Infinite Menus. After quite a
    > bit of back and forth with them, I did get it to work
    > (www.minusforty.ca). I believe that BestBuy uses this one, too, but
    > they're not using iframes and (well, mine works better).


    "This page is expected to be completed very shortly." appears on quite
    a number of pages. You shouldn't have those on the menu until completed.
    I also found the minusforty site "confusing for a newbie" with
    links/menus on the left, the top, and the right. A well-designed menu
    should be all in one spot.

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Aug 7, 2007
    #17
  18. mjones

    mjones Guest

    On Aug 6, 7:13 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
    <> wrote:
    > mjones wrote:
    > > I see what you mean about Javascript, but as I mentioned above, our
    > > user stats show 0.39% Java disabled and 0.77 JavaScript disabled.
    > > These are not significant enough numbers (bye bye only a few days each
    > > year) to make me throw out months of work and start again. I'm sure
    > > my client will agree.

    >
    > You missed the part about the search engines not reading and executing
    > JavaScript. To them, it's a blank page(s). Your content will never be
    > indexed by Google and the others. How will people find you?
    >
    > > Also, one of my other clients is Sun Microsystems. I think they'd
    > > like me to use their product.

    >
    > What product is that?
    >
    > > Also, I wouldn't know how to go about redesigning the menuing system
    > > in html. I think these sites are too big for that.

    >
    > Our opinions differ on that. <g>
    >
    > > I last site I
    > > made I used a menu application called Infinite Menus. After quite a
    > > bit of back and forth with them, I did get it to work
    > > (www.minusforty.ca). I believe that BestBuy uses this one, too, but
    > > they're not using iframes and (well, mine works better).

    >
    > "This page is expected to be completed very shortly." appears on quite
    > a number of pages. You shouldn't have those on the menu until completed.
    > I also found the minusforty site "confusing for a newbie" with
    > links/menus on the left, the top, and the right. A well-designed menu
    > should be all in one spot.
    >
    > --
    > -bts
    > -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck


    Thanks for your input on the minus forty site. It game me an idea
    that will help the confusion.

    I didn't say html menus were not possible. I have used them. I just
    found them limiting, considering that I'm one of the limitations,
    too. But then I didn't know about the Javascript search engine issue,
    which puts a whole new light on things. Do you have an example of a
    good html menu; one that has a main menu and submenus?

    Do I understand you to mean that most websites with Javascript driven
    menus will only get the pages indexed by search engines that can be
    viewed without Javascript? Really? And then would it help to have a
    site map in basic html as a stop gap measure to redoing all the code?

    Thanks again,

    Michele

    P.S. - Any ideas on my original request?
     
    mjones, Aug 7, 2007
    #18
  19. mjones wrote:

    > I didn't say html menus were not possible. I have used them. I just
    > found them limiting, considering that I'm one of the limitations,
    > too. But then I didn't know about the Javascript search engine
    > issue, which puts a whole new light on things. Do you have an
    > example of a good html menu; one that has a main menu and submenus?


    One of mine: http://fingerlakesbmw.org/

    > Do I understand you to mean that most websites with Javascript driven
    > menus will only get the pages indexed by search engines that can be
    > viewed without Javascript?


    Yes, that's it. Your content does not appear unless JavaScript is
    executed. The search engine bots do not do that, so no content. Nothing
    to index except your header.

    > Really? And then would it help to have a site map in basic html as a
    > stop gap measure to redoing all the code?


    A site map is always a good idea, for both the bots and your visitors.
    Howsomeever, when the bot follows your site map links to the other
    pages, and the JavaScript *doesn't execute*, no content is seen.

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Aug 7, 2007
    #19
  20. mjones

    Bergamot Guest

    Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
    > mjones wrote:
    >
    >> Yes, hand coded if I understand what you mean. I use HomeSite,

    >
    > Your sites are not hand-coded. Hand-coding is when you type everything
    > in the "source" with your keyboard, not using a WYSIWYMG product such as
    > HoseSite.


    You are mistaken here. I've been using HomeSite for years. It's a very
    good plain text editor and web authoring tool. Some versions do have
    some WYSIWYG-like features, but they are best ignored.

    --
    Berg
     
    Bergamot, Aug 7, 2007
    #20
    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. Eric
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,025
    Blinky the Shark
    May 30, 2006
  2. mi
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    13,626
    dorayme
    May 21, 2008
  3. Mounir
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    110
  4. Daedalous
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    706
    Daedalous
    Jan 16, 2004
  5. Paul
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    143
Loading...

Share This Page