opinons wanted on menu

Discussion in 'HTML' started by richard, Sep 24, 2008.

  1. richard

    richard Guest

    <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>

    Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    Any reason(s) NOT to use it?
     
    richard, Sep 24, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Gazing into my crystal ball I observed richard <> writing in
    news:eek::

    ><http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    >
    > Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    > Any reason(s) NOT to use it?
    >
    >


    Personally, I hate these kinds of menus, on web pages, and in programs. By
    the time I get the mouse over to where I need to click, the menu has
    disappeared.

    --
    Adrienne Boswell at Home
    Arbpen Web Site Design Services
    http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
    Please respond to the group so others can share
     
    Adrienne Boswell, Sep 24, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <Xns9B2382EB231Farbpenyahoocom@69.16.185.247>,
    Adrienne Boswell <> wrote:

    > Gazing into my crystal ball I observed richard <> writing in
    > news:eek::
    >
    > ><http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    > >
    > > Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    > > Any reason(s) NOT to use it?
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Personally, I hate these kinds of menus, on web pages, and in programs. By
    > the time I get the mouse over to where I need to click, the menu has
    > disappeared.


    Table-tennis. That helps train coordination. Do you have difficulty with
    one level dropdown menus? Please say no, as I am about to launch my
    first single level drop down. Play some table tennis before answering if
    in doubt.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 24, 2008
    #3
  4. richard

    rf Guest

    "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <Xns9B2382EB231Farbpenyahoocom@69.16.185.247>,
    > Adrienne Boswell <> wrote:
    >
    >> Gazing into my crystal ball I observed richard <> writing
    >> in
    >> news:eek::
    >>
    >> ><http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    >> >
    >> > Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    >> > Any reason(s) NOT to use it?


    Several.

    >> Personally, I hate these kinds of menus, on web pages, and in programs.
    >> By
    >> the time I get the mouse over to where I need to click, the menu has
    >> disappeared.

    >
    > Table-tennis. That helps train coordination. Do you have difficulty with
    > one level dropdown menus? Please say no, as I am about to launch my
    > first single level drop down. Play some table tennis before answering if
    > in doubt.


    Does a grueling match of real tennis last night count?

    I have no problem with dropdowns providing they obey two rules:

    1) The dropper (the bit you hover over to activate the dropee) *is* an
    actual link that leads to a page that reproduces the dropee as a normal
    static sub menu.

    This way one caters (as you, dorayme, have done for your forthcoming launch)
    for the viewer who uses keyboard or speach or other disability things, or
    suffers from a lack (as is a problem with the OP's offering) of javascript,
    all of which preclude the viewer from activating the dropdown.

    And yes, I have seen many sites where the dropper is not a link but
    something else (<li>?) with a javascript onclick event handler.

    2) The dropper and the dropee are large enough and overlap each other in
    such a way that allows the mouse cursor to be moved from the former to the
    latter without the dropee scarpering off somewhere. The OP's offering, by
    specifying a stupidly small font-size: 11px;, fails here IMHO.



    That said I agree with Adrienne. I rarely these days use that epitome ot
    dropdown/flyout/dropup menus, the Windows Start Button. Rather I use
    explorer and drill down to the *data* I want to edit, and rely on Windows to
    launch the appropriate "editor" for that data. "Programs" I use day to day,
    such as browsers, live inside their icon on the quick launch menu.

    Hmmm. What ever happened to those "hyperlink" things, you know, those <a
    href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperlink">navigation elements</a> inside
    the actual page content?
     
    rf, Sep 24, 2008
    #4
  5. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <jYnCk.363$>,
    "rf" <> wrote:

    > "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > In article <Xns9B2382EB231Farbpenyahoocom@69.16.185.247>,
    > > Adrienne Boswell <> wrote:


    > >> Personally, I hate these kinds of menus, on web pages, and in programs.
    > >> By
    > >> the time I get the mouse over to where I need to click, the menu has
    > >> disappeared.

    > >
    > > Table-tennis. That helps train coordination. Do you have difficulty with
    > > one level dropdown menus? Please say no, as I am about to launch my
    > > first single level drop down. Play some table tennis before answering if
    > > in doubt.

    >
    > Does a grueling match of real tennis last night count?
    >


    No, not quite fine and quick-quick enough to count in this matter. Did
    you see the Olympic game TT matches? That sure put my school
    championship titles in perspective.

    > I have no problem with dropdowns providing they obey two rules:
    >
    > 1) The dropper (the bit you hover over to activate the dropee) *is* an
    > actual link that leads to a page that reproduces the dropee as a normal
    > static sub menu.
    >


    Hey! I pass test one then.

    > This way one caters (as you, dorayme, have done for your forthcoming launch)
    > for the viewer who uses keyboard or speach or other disability things, or
    > suffers from a lack (as is a problem with the OP's offering) of javascript,
    > all of which preclude the viewer from activating the dropdown.


    > 2) The dropper and the dropee are large enough and overlap each other in
    > such a way that allows the mouse cursor to be moved from the former to the
    > latter without the dropee scarpering off somewhere. The OP's offering, by
    > specifying a stupidly small font-size: 11px;, fails here IMHO.
    >


    I think I pass this too. It is impossible to get lost in any gap of
    mine. (But I am toying with .85em for the list within list, I must
    admit. However I am fashioning line-heights for the sublinks to be
    generous in compensation.

    Totally agree with your sentiments here.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 24, 2008
    #5
  6. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    dorayme <> wrote:

    > In article <jYnCk.363$>,
    > "rf" <> wrote:


    > Totally agree with your sentiments here.
    >


    I forgot to add that it sometimes is good to repeat the main link in a
    first item of the dropdown itself so that those who can operate
    dropdowns are not confused. They might *miss* the fact that the main
    link is a link and think that they *must* operate one of the submenu
    items. The sight of the hand cursor over the head link might just be
    attributed vaguely to it pointing to a sublist of links.

    So sometimes good to make the first sub item the very same link. It
    depends on the circumstances. In my case, the main and first sublink go
    to an index section page where all is revealed in plain sight in a table
    menu of the contents of that section.

    The dropdown I have worked on recently is for a home page and is not so
    much a quick facility for folk to navigate (though familiar visitors
    will no doubt so use it) but to give information in a compact form. More
    clues about what is in the site, more details about the range of
    products, say. They don't *need* these details on the home page so it is
    very much an extra. These things become important in designing home
    pages rather than inside pages.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 24, 2008
    #6
  7. richard

    Roy A. Guest

    On 24 Sep, 05:57, richard <> wrote:
    > <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    >
    > Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    > Any reason(s) NOT to use it?


    These kinds of menus isn't visual effective. If you're on a sub page
    like Industries -> Infrastructure, the expanded menu items isn't
    related to anything on that page. It's like going throughout the whole
    site map every time you want to go to a new page. The sub categories
    for the current page isn't listed anywhere.

    Think about it, have you ever used a site map to navigate the content
    of a site? I don't think so. The menu isn't as cool as it look.
     
    Roy A., Sep 24, 2008
    #7
  8. richard

    rf Guest

    "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > dorayme <> wrote:
    >
    >> In article <jYnCk.363$>,
    >> "rf" <> wrote:

    >
    >> Totally agree with your sentiments here.


    Streuth. There's a first :)

    > I forgot to add that it sometimes is good to repeat the main link in a
    > first item of the dropdown itself so that those who can operate
    > dropdowns are not confused. They might *miss* the fact that the main
    > link is a link and think that they *must* operate one of the submenu
    > items. The sight of the hand cursor over the head link might just be
    > attributed vaguely to it pointing to a sublist of links.


    Hmmm. For those who have been "trained" to the broken model where the head
    link is not a link? Good point though.

    > The dropdown I have worked on recently is for a home page and is not so
    > much a quick facility for folk to navigate (though familiar visitors
    > will no doubt so use it) but to give information in a compact form. More
    > clues about what is in the site, more details about the range of
    > products, say. They don't *need* these details on the home page so it is
    > very much an extra. These things become important in designing home
    > pages rather than inside pages.


    Once again Hmmm. "Home page"? Define exactly a "home page".

    Oh, yes, that is the one that appears if you don't say anything after
    http://example.com/ bit, but why? Are you making your "home page" into an
    index into your site? A "site map" perchance?

    The original hyperlink paradigm didn't include the concept of "home" page.
    Witness the wikipedia. You drift in there from google and spend hours
    wandering around their pages, following the hyperlinks. I don't think I have
    even viewed their "home page' :)
     
    rf, Sep 24, 2008
    #8
  9. richard <> writes:

    > <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    >
    > Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    > Any reason(s) NOT to use it?


    Yes - it requires JavaScript to work. Basic features such as
    navigating around a site should not require JS.

    sherm--

    --
    My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
    Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
     
    Sherm Pendley, Sep 24, 2008
    #9
  10. richard

    richard Guest

    On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 10:03:08 -0400, Sherm Pendley
    <> wrote:

    >richard <> writes:
    >
    >> <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    >>
    >> Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    >> Any reason(s) NOT to use it?

    >
    >Yes - it requires JavaScript to work. Basic features such as
    >navigating around a site should not require JS.
    >


    The only reason for the JS is because it's needed to make it work in a
    version of IE.
    If you had read the page the menu description is on, you would know
    that.
    I tried it without JS and it works just the same.
     
    richard, Sep 24, 2008
    #10
  11. richard

    richard Guest

    On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 04:42:44 -0700 (PDT), "Roy A."
    <> wrote:

    >On 24 Sep, 05:57, richard <> wrote:
    >> <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    >>
    >> Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    >> Any reason(s) NOT to use it?

    >
    >These kinds of menus isn't visual effective. If you're on a sub page
    >like Industries -> Infrastructure, the expanded menu items isn't
    >related to anything on that page. It's like going throughout the whole
    >site map every time you want to go to a new page. The sub categories
    >for the current page isn't listed anywhere.
    >
    >Think about it, have you ever used a site map to navigate the content
    >of a site? I don't think so. The menu isn't as cool as it look.


    Actually, I have. As sometimes you can find what you want easier and
    quicker than on the main menu page. Sometimes, the main menu doesn't
    list everything.

    The listings you saw in this menu are there just for demo purposes.
     
    richard, Sep 24, 2008
    #11
  12. richard

    richard Guest

    On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 07:48:16 GMT, Adrienne Boswell <>
    wrote:

    >Gazing into my crystal ball I observed richard <> writing in
    >news:eek::
    >
    >><http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    >>
    >> Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    >> Any reason(s) NOT to use it?
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Personally, I hate these kinds of menus, on web pages, and in programs. By
    >the time I get the mouse over to where I need to click, the menu has
    >disappeared.


    I know what you mean. As soon as the pointer moves off the hover area,
    it collapses and you got to start all over.
     
    richard, Sep 24, 2008
    #12
  13. richard

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    Sherm Pendley wrote:

    > richard <> writes:
    >
    > > <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    > >
    > > Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    > > Any reason(s) NOT to use it?

    >
    > Yes - it requires JavaScript to work. Basic features such as
    > navigating around a site should not require JS.
    >
    > sherm--
    >

    Well yes, but if this is the same Richard that has posted a lot in
    this group recently, then we would have already (or should have
    already known this).
    All this stuff is BAYSIC web design related stuff that all should know
    when doing such work.
    --
    Regards Chad http://freewebdesignonline.org
     
    Chaddy2222, Sep 24, 2008
    #13
  14. richard <> writes:

    > On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 10:03:08 -0400, Sherm Pendley
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>richard <> writes:
    >>
    >>> <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    >>>
    >>> Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    >>> Any reason(s) NOT to use it?

    >>
    >>Yes - it requires JavaScript to work. Basic features such as
    >>navigating around a site should not require JS.
    >>

    >
    > The only reason for the JS is because it's needed to make it work in a
    > version of IE.


    In other words, if users of that version of IE have disabled JS, it
    doesn't work for them.

    > If you had read the page the menu description is on, you would know
    > that.
    > I tried it without JS and it works just the same.


    I tried it too - I'm not in the habit of guessing about things that
    are trivially easy to verify.

    In FF 3, when I disabled JS, it didn't work.

    sherm--

    --
    My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
    Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
     
    Sherm Pendley, Sep 24, 2008
    #14
  15. richard

    Roy A. Guest

    On 24 Sep, 16:03, Sherm Pendley <> wrote:
    > richard <> writes:
    > > <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>

    >
    > > Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    > > Any reason(s) NOT to use it?

    >
    > Yes - it requires JavaScript to work. Basic features such as
    > navigating around a site should not require JS.


    No, it doesn't require JavaScript. The example in the link doesn't use
    any JavaScript.
     
    Roy A., Sep 24, 2008
    #15
  16. "Roy A." <> writes:

    > On 24 Sep, 16:03, Sherm Pendley <> wrote:
    >> richard <> writes:
    >> > <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>

    >>
    >> > Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    >> > Any reason(s) NOT to use it?

    >>
    >> Yes - it requires JavaScript to work. Basic features such as
    >> navigating around a site should not require JS.

    >
    > No, it doesn't require JavaScript. The example in the link doesn't use
    > any JavaScript.


    What makes you think I'm just guessing?

    When I disable JS in FireFox 3, the menu rollovers stop working. I've
    tested this and verified it twice.

    sherm--

    --
    My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
    Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
     
    Sherm Pendley, Sep 24, 2008
    #16
  17. Sherm Pendley <> writes:

    > "Roy A." <> writes:
    >
    >> On 24 Sep, 16:03, Sherm Pendley <> wrote:
    >>> richard <> writes:
    >>> > <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    >>>
    >>> > Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    >>> > Any reason(s) NOT to use it?
    >>>
    >>> Yes - it requires JavaScript to work. Basic features such as
    >>> navigating around a site should not require JS.

    >>
    >> No, it doesn't require JavaScript. The example in the link doesn't use
    >> any JavaScript.

    >
    > What makes you think I'm just guessing?
    >
    > When I disable JS in FireFox 3, the menu rollovers stop working. I've
    > tested this and verified it twice.


    And again in Safari 3.1, with identical results - disabling JS means
    no menu rollovers.

    sherm--

    --
    My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
    Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
     
    Sherm Pendley, Sep 24, 2008
    #17
  18. richard

    richard Guest

    On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:33:56 -0400, Sherm Pendley
    <> wrote:

    >richard <> writes:
    >
    >> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 10:03:08 -0400, Sherm Pendley
    >> <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>richard <> writes:
    >>>
    >>>> <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    >>>>
    >>>> Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    >>>> Any reason(s) NOT to use it?
    >>>
    >>>Yes - it requires JavaScript to work. Basic features such as
    >>>navigating around a site should not require JS.
    >>>

    >>
    >> The only reason for the JS is because it's needed to make it work in a
    >> version of IE.

    >
    >In other words, if users of that version of IE have disabled JS, it
    >doesn't work for them.
    >
    >> If you had read the page the menu description is on, you would know
    >> that.
    >> I tried it without JS and it works just the same.

    >
    >I tried it too - I'm not in the habit of guessing about things that
    >are trivially easy to verify.
    >
    >In FF 3, when I disabled JS, it didn't work.
    >
    >sherm--


    From the page source:
    <!--[imcode]*** Infinite Menus Settings / Code - This script reference
    must appear last. ***

    *Note: This script is required for scripted add on support and
    IE 6 sub menu functionality.
    *Note: This menu will fully function in all CSS2 browsers with
    the script removed.-->

    I use FF2 and it works with JS off.
     
    richard, Sep 24, 2008
    #18
  19. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <>,
    "Roy A." <> wrote:

    > On 24 Sep, 05:57, richard <> wrote:
    > > <http://www.opencube.com/samples/im/sample14/sample.html>
    > >
    > > Would this be a "suckerfish" style menu?
    > > Any reason(s) NOT to use it?

    >
    > These kinds of menus isn't visual effective.


    Funny thing to say (apart from the grammar) when you have no context yet
    for where such a menu might be?

    > If you're on a sub page
    > like Industries -> Infrastructure, the expanded menu items isn't
    > related to anything on that page. It's like going throughout the whole
    > site map every time you want to go to a new page. The sub categories
    > for the current page isn't listed anywhere.
    >


    Perhaps you are jumping to conclusions? Perhaps the issue of a dropdown
    menu and where it goes (whether just once on one page or repeated on
    other pages without variation) is another question.

    > Think about it, have you ever used a site map to navigate the content
    > of a site? I don't think so. The menu isn't as cool as it look.


    Why mention the worst case possibility - an author intending it as "the"
    site map - as an argument against the coolness of the whole idea of any
    dropdown?

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 24, 2008
    #19
  20. richard

    dorayme Guest

    In article <JJpCk.386$>,
    "rf" <> wrote:

    > "dorayme" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > In article <>,
    > > dorayme <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> In article <jYnCk.363$>,
    > >> "rf" <> wrote:

    > >
    > >> Totally agree with your sentiments here.

    >
    > Streuth. There's a first :)
    >


    Bullshit. I have often agreed with you and even more. Those who I tease
    (or worse still) can take their place in a sort of choir of voices in my
    HTML/CSS conscience if they say sensible things.
    >
    > > I forgot to add that it sometimes is good to repeat the main link in a
    > > first item of the dropdown itself ...


    > Hmmm. For those who have been "trained" to the broken model where the head
    > link is not a link? Good point though.
    >
    > > The dropdown I have worked on recently is for a home page and is not so
    > > much a quick facility for folk to navigate (though familiar visitors
    > > will no doubt so use it) but to give information in a compact form. More
    > > clues about what is in the site, more details about the range of
    > > products, say. They don't *need* these details on the home page so it is
    > > very much an extra. These things become important in designing home
    > > pages rather than inside pages.

    >
    > Once again Hmmm. "Home page"? Define exactly a "home page".
    >
    > Oh, yes, that is the one that appears if you don't say anything after
    > http://example.com/ bit, but why? Are you making your "home page" into an
    > index into your site? A "site map" perchance?
    >


    No, I have never made any home page a site map. But I would not in
    advance say that it would be wrong to do so for any site. (I am
    surprised you ask because I was pretty keen to stress that I was making
    a *one level* dropdown and resisting any further temptations for the
    moment)

    Some sites I just keep home page simple, few words and a mainly self
    explanatory set of links to the main sections, no sub details. Others, I
    get stuck into with real material. If it is an essay, for example, no
    need to mess about, the first paragraphs can go right in there!

    It all depends on lots of things. Some houses have porches, others
    hallways where people can come in from the cold and hang their hats and
    stick their brollies and check themselves out in the mirror before
    entering one of the main rooms. A hotel lobby with a lift and a
    directory. There are a million models. Let's not stifle imagination in
    advance and say what has or has not to be.

    And let us not jump to conclusions about what analogies are apt or how
    they are to be interpreted. Remember, Harlan keeps lists about
    analogies, those who use them, misuse them, understand and misunderstand
    them and it is a tricky area. Be careful. I think St Peter is trying to
    get the rights to Harlan's list.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 24, 2008
    #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. Harvey
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    789
    Harvey
    Jul 16, 2004
  2. Harvey
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    896
    Daniel
    Jul 16, 2004
  3. Duncan Strang
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    2,129
    John C. Bollinger
    Mar 3, 2004
  4. javerra
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    690
    =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?=
    Feb 11, 2007
  5. Kevin Blakeley

    Book Opinons

    Kevin Blakeley, Dec 2, 2003, in forum: ASP .Net Building Controls
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    137
    Wayne
    Dec 3, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page