Opinion: Do web standards matter?

[me]

I find it harder to read a 1000px wide page in a 500px wide window
(horizontal scrolling for each line) than to read really long
sentences.


Correct, when using fluid design, one should take image size into
account.


No, with fixed width:
a) you don't have the option to make your window narrower than that
fixed width. Not without serious usability problems (horizontal
scrolling for each line you want to read).
b) setting a max-width that suits you will break the layout. Unless
the author of the fixed width page has made it fluid underneath the
fixed width. Most fixed width authors don't do that.

Yup, c) is an option for every Windows user.


You don't like full screen then, you like large empty spaces.
The thing is, that I want my pages to be accessible by everyone. Not
just you.
My Dad browses full screen too. On 800x600. To cater for him and use
fixed width, I'd have to set the fixed with to 750px. (he uses IE
without a favourites bar open or something).
Now there are people who prefer a larger font-size. For them, the
fixed width of 750px means that the menu takes up half the space, and
the text contains lines of 3 or 4 words. Very hard to read. And very
silly, if they bought an expensive 22inch screen to accommodate their
bad eyesight! All that wasted space...

Now - tell me again that I should use fixed width because /you/ like
to use your browser full screen on a large resolution?

IIRC you said you use a user style sheet so override the fixed layout or
font there. IE users can override fonts if they choose by opting to do so in
the accessibility options.
Signed,
me

 

[me]

No more so than table-based designs. After all, a table is a table -- a
grid of boxes.

Depends on the design.
Signed,
me

 

[me]

Now I'm even more confused. I just changed the font sizes in IE on a site
I've maintained for 5 years & on pages with the original coding IE can
change the size & they look fine.

If you used h1 through h6 then the size is proportional in relation to the
base size and will change if the user opts too.

But on the newer pages in which I used
style tags, IE can't do a thing re sizes.

You (like I) may be using a fixed size like 12px (or less useful 12pt, I
don't use this).

Did everyone know that about style
tags? How does CSS address font sizing by the user's browser? Now I'm
wishing I had never started using style tags (or whatever they are called.
Embedded CSS?)

I checked a site last week in FF & some of the fonts changed size, while
others did not.

I don't use FF but I know IE is sometimes lax about inheriting styles from
parent items. To avoid this I apply styles to every tag that needs it.

Maybe I'll seek a new career. I'm too old for this stuff.
Carla

If you can make money at this racket then more power to you!
Signed,
me

 

[Els]

IIRC you said you use a user style sheet so override the fixed layout or
font there. IE users can override fonts if they choose by opting to do so in
the accessibility options.

You can't expect the ordinary surfer to use a user style sheet. (how
many people know what HTML looks like, let alone CSS?) You can expect
them however to make their window wider or narrower to their liking.

 

[me]

[snip]

Why do sites built using pure CSS look so similar? Why do they, almost all
that I've seen where it was brought to my attention that they were built
with CSS, look boxy, boring and spread all the way across my 19" monitor?
Including the text! Don't those authors care about usability (as opposed to
accessibility)? Most people can comfortably read only 400 pixels across at a
stretch.

I know you can approximate the layout & look of a site built with tables in
CSS (saw it done in an example on a website), so why do so many CSS sites
look so bad? And so similar? Is it something inherent in coding with CSS?

IMO if IE had better support for CSS positioning and if an authoring tool
offered an intuitive method to use CSS positioning this situation might
improve.

Tables need not be fragile if the numbers add up. They must be precise.
Carla

I suspect some (many?) designers never came to grips with tables, errors can
be interesting to fix, call me weird but I kind of enjoy it, it's a
challenge. A table design can also be difficult to alter without the right
tools and know how. I suspect some find this cumbersome or frustrating.
Signed,
me

 

[Uncle Pirate]

Travis Newbury wrote:




No more so than table-based designs. After all, a table is a table -- a
grid of boxes.

True. Except there are far more *designers* using tables to keep their
artwork in place modifying that boxy look. I agree with Travis, we need
more artists (designers) using CSS or working with the *developers* to
get away from the boxy look with CSS.

I believe this just looking at my own pages; it is obvious that I am a
*developer*, not a *designer*. I can create some fairly good code but I
have to depend upon others to help me with my designs.

That's not to say that there are some very good designers that are also
very good with css; just take a look at http://www.csszengarden.com/ for
examples. I've spent hours there checking out the various designs.
Neat stuff!

--
Stan McCann "Uncle Pirate" http://stanmccann.us/pirate.html
Webmaster/Computer Center Manager, NMSU at Alamogordo
Coordinator, Tularosa Basin Chapter, ABATE of NM; AMA#758681; COBB
'94 1500 Vulcan (now wrecked) http://motorcyclefun.org/Dcp_2068c.jpg
A zest for living must include a willingness to die. - R.A. Heinlein

 

[Alan J. Flavell]

Flavell wrote "installs"; you wrote "opened".

Indeed. If you change the window size, or switch to fullscreen mode,
and exit the browser normally, then in my experience it'll remember
that, and open the browser the same way next time. It usually
inherits these settings when a new version of the same browser is
installed, too.

But the initial browser installation, for all the usual browsers, has
been windowed, not fullscreen, until some user action was taken to
change that.

 

[me]

Yes you do have a choice of maximum size but not minmum size, not
at: http://www.csszengarden.com/. In IE6 on Windows I see a
horizontal scrollbar if the resolution [window size] is below
1024x768 (I like 800x600 just to be clear).

This must be something peculiar to your setup. I don't see a
horizontal scrollbar at csszengarden in a window size of ~800 pixels
wide. IE6, or numerous other browsers with Win2K.

That's weird the first time I visited there was a scroll bar but now it's
gone, go figure.

The one previously mentioned link - style sheet 153 - gets a scrollbar
at about ~850 and below, but the rest of the choices do not.

OT: Say how's your life now that I've given it meaning, you seem to delight
in trolling around after me commenting on just my posts. ;-)
Signed,
me

 

[Adrienne]

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Lauri Raittila

Hurts my eyes and is very bad indeed.


Unfortunaltely can hardly be called good example of CSS layout. The
good thing about CSS is that you can do lots of things with it that you
can't do with table layouts. The bad thing is the same.

Show him and yourself this screen cap:
http://www.student.oulu.fi/~laurirai/crap/screen.png

To fix it so that design don't break I had to:
- disable my general userstylesheet (line-height 1.5)
- disable my current font size userstylesheet (was something like 16px)
- disable my min font size thingy (it was 12px)
especially the last one I never use normally, I'm in user mode before
that.

Anyway, the problem is in sites coding. (the 3col layout is IMO stupid
idea anyway) It would be possible, of course, to make it not break,
even using current CSS.

Thanks for that. Actually, the person has not paid me for subsequent work,
so I'm going to leave it be. If he pays me, I'll fix it.

 

[Uncle Pirate]

I (having taught computer science for 5 years at Central Texas College)
Also understand how most people use most applications full screen. I
don't think it is so much "don't understand the benefits of multiple
windows" as it is a I, and others, just like my applications full
screen. Currently, I create SCORM learning content (mostly based in Flash)

Still close by? Which campus? I believe they have a campus in El Paso
which is about 80 miles away from me.

As for full-screen vs. windowed, I'm a multiple window kind of guy. I
like Alan's? comparison of screen desktop with desk desktop. I even go
further than that; I have a switchbox that switches between my Linux
desktop and Windows desktop and remote from both of these to other
systems as well so I may have 4 computers instantly available (push of a
button or click of the mouse) and each of those desktops may have a
dozen or more applications open. Maximized windows just get in my way.

I do not argue the benefits of web standards, accessibility, or the use
of css over tables for design of a site who's main goal is sales or
information meant for a generic audience. Our website does them all as
our audience is teachers and learning services at corporations. (sigh,
we are fixed width though). Our applications on the other hand are all
flash based, and if connecting to a SCORM LMS require javascript.
Speaking of which, Don't you find it interesting (as an educator) that
the Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) SCORM standards (which are
probably more accepted as standards from their respected communities,
than w3c is with html and css) REQUIRE a browser with javascript AND if
using Flash, require IE (because of live connect). When the education
community got together and came up with a set of standards fr building
learning content, they decided this was the best way to go.

That's too bad. I cannot think of a single valid reason to ever require
JavaScript, Flash, cookies, etc. But, NMSU has done it too. I have
multiple browsers installed so that I can get into the system where I
put in my leave time logging into a system that requires cookies and
JavaScript (why not do the tracking on YOUR computer instead of mine?),
the system opens new windows (I've set it for tabs) for screens with ONE
link to get to another new window with ONE link. It is IMO a horrible
thoughtless mess that I MUST deal with because it's part of my job. I
have to log into it frequently to reset user passwords, approve my
employee's time sheets, and enter any leave I take.

--
Stan McCann "Uncle Pirate" http://stanmccann.us/pirate.html
Webmaster/Computer Center Manager, NMSU at Alamogordo
Coordinator, Tularosa Basin Chapter, ABATE of NM; AMA#758681; COBB
'94 1500 Vulcan (now wrecked) http://motorcyclefun.org/Dcp_2068c.jpg
A zest for living must include a willingness to die. - R.A. Heinlein

 

[c.thornquist]

Are you deliberately taking the mickey, or are you really so
clue-impaired?

Apparently I'm "really so clue-impaired." Please enlighten me.

Carla

 

[c.thornquist]

How about a test? <g>

.pxunit { width: 420px; }
.emunit { width: <numberofchoicehere>em; }

<p class="pxunit">A long paragraph of text here...</p>
<p class="emunit">A long paragraph of text here...</p>

Then experiment by changing the text size in your various browsers.

I just wanted an approximation. Didn't know there was none. I'll try your
test

Carla

 

[c.thornquist]

Then do as Alan suggests and use a stylesheet with max-width in it.
Then all the sites you're complaining about will be restricted to your
max-width. That way you get exactly your preferred width, not the
authors preferred width or some average preferred width based on the
half dozen people the author spoke to when building the site.

Please don't imply that I am "complaining" about numerous sites. I only gave
the w3.org site as an example.

Neither you, nor I, know the decision making process involved on websites
belonging to others.

There will be sloppy sites, just as there are sloppy people & sloppy houses.
I detect an elitist attitude among some die-hard CSS purists.

A support technician at a hosting company I use said that web designers are
the plumbers (blue collar workers) of the internet. As with those in the
building trades union, web developers are paid well in large cities. Outside
of large metro areas we are hustling small business owners for work. They do
not want to pay more than $300.00-$500.00 for a website. So we have to build
them fast. If we want them to look good, then we use what works with the
settings & in the browsers that 90% of visitors use. That's reality.

4" wide at what font size? With which font and leading? How far away
from the screen are you sitting? For me 4" would be much too narrow.

At 11-12px in Arial.

Studies have shown that narrow columns with wide margins are nearly as
bad as wide columns with narrow margins. Medium-to-wide columns with
moderate margins seem best but of course it also depends on font size,
etc.


420px divided by your font size in pixels

So for me 420px is 30em but for you it will likely be different. (I
have my font size set smaller than the factory default.)

Steve

That you, Steve, for explaining em minus the attitude

Carla

 

[Peter1968]

Indeed. If you change the window size, or switch to fullscreen mode,
and exit the browser normally, then in my experience it'll remember
that, and open the browser the same way next time. It usually
inherits these settings when a new version of the same browser is
installed, too.

But the initial browser installation, for all the usual browsers, has
been windowed, not fullscreen, until some user action was taken to
change that.

Like I wrote in another post, Amaya 9.1 actually installed and opened
first go maximized. I think I just used the word "opened" myself, which
isn't quite the same thing.

But no, Amaya is by no means a "usual browser".

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

OT: Say how's your life now that I've given it meaning, you seem to
delight in trolling around after me commenting on just my posts.
;-)

Heh, then your newsreader must be broken. I've replied to others in
this very thread, and in numerous other threads in this group and
quite a few other groups. Though I doubt if we read the same ~50 groups.

My life has had meaning for decades!

 

[c.thornquist]

You can't expect the ordinary surfer to use a user style sheet. (how
many people know what HTML looks like, let alone CSS?) You can expect
them however to make their window wider or narrower to their liking.

How does one implement a user stylesheet when browsing?

Carla (clue-impaired yet again)

 

[Steve Pugh]

At 11-12px in Arial.

That's your default font size? That's rather on the small side. 12px
is what I have set as my minimum font size (my default is 14px so it's
still smaller than most browser defaults). So you'd have to agree that
if 4" is right for you it would be too narrow for many other people.

That you, Steve, for explaining em minus the attitude

Oh, I have lots of attitude...

Steve

 

[Els]

How does one implement a user stylesheet when browsing?

To be honest, I don't know. I remember having seen the option once in
one of my browsers, but I forgot where it was and even in which
browser.

Carla (clue-impaired yet again)

Like me then ;-)

 

[Steve Pugh]

How does one implement a user stylesheet when browsing?

Write a stylesheet that you would like applied to all sites (pay
attention to section 6.4.1 of the CSS 2 spec to understand how your
styles and the authors styles will combine). Then read the
documentation of your browser to see how to apply your stylesheet.

Your stylesheet can contain generic styles (e.g. setting a background
colour for all pages) or more specific stuff. See
http://steve.pugh.net/articles/taming.html for an example of how I use
user styles to (un)fix a site that puts all its contents in narrow
columns.

Steve

 

[Michael Stemper]

I'll try to think of analogies in other media & art forms whereby standards
(not related to health & safety) are required to be met, before
publication/viewing by others. That may aid in understanding both sides.

How about PAL or NTSC? If your television broadcast doesn't follow one
(the right one) of those standards, the user agents (television sets)
will probably not display it properly.

If you encode music on a small circular piece of metal without following
the standards set forth by Philips, the user agents (CD players) will
probably not display it properly.