What does your implementation process look like?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Daan, Sep 25, 2007.

  1. Daan

    Daan Guest

    A question for the regulars / experts in this group: what does your
    implementation process look like? I mean: when you need to make a
    page, do you work with a designer and 'implement' his design? Do you
    design and code the page yourself? Do you have a lot of influence on
    the design / implementation of the site, or very little? (I'm
    interested in the design / layout / usability aspect of the process,
    not the content of the site).

    The reason I ask is that often advice is given against e.g. the use of
    frames, against adjusting font sizes or use of particular fonts, or
    all kinds of 'general' best practices, but I can imagine that your
    designer, your client or your boss might disagree.

    So, how often can you implement all of the best practices?

    Regards,
    Daan
     
    Daan, Sep 25, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Daan wrote:

    > The reason I ask is that often advice is given against e.g. the use of
    > frames,


    "Frames are evil." ..and a general nuisance to maintain as well. There
    is reason for all the numerous pages describing why. Such as:
    http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil

    > against adjusting font sizes


    No, against *setting* font sizes. Let the visitor decide.

    > or use of particular fonts,


    There is no point in assigning an oddball font that your visitors will
    not have on their computers. Browsers will attempt to fill in with
    something the computer *does* have, which may be completely different
    than what you envision. (Or they may screw up really bad if you didn't
    specify a fallback family.)

    > or all kinds of 'general' best practices,


    ...such as accessibilty, useability...

    > but I can imagine that your designer, your client or your boss might
    > disagree.


    If your 'designer' disagrees with the practice of following standards,
    you need a new one. The boss .. well .. try to explain why his wants are
    contrary to good web practices.

    --
    -bts
    -Pixel perfection is made of unobtanium
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Sep 25, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Daan

    Daan Guest

    On Sep 25, 5:22 pm, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
    <> wrote:
    > Daan wrote:
    > > The reason I ask is that often advice is given against e.g. the use of
    > > frames,

    >
    > "Frames are evil." ..and a general nuisance to maintain as well. There
    > is reason for all the numerous pages describing why. Such as:http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil
    >
    > > against adjusting font sizes

    >
    > No, against *setting* font sizes. Let the visitor decide.
    >
    > > or use of particular fonts,

    >
    > There is no point in assigning an oddball font that your visitors will
    > not have on their computers. Browsers will attempt to fill in with
    > something the computer *does* have, which may be completely different
    > than what you envision. (Or they may screw up really bad if you didn't
    > specify a fallback family.)
    >
    > > or all kinds of 'general' best practices,

    >
    > ..such as accessibilty, useability...
    >
    > > but I can imagine that your designer, your client or your boss might
    > > disagree.

    >
    > If your 'designer' disagrees with the practice of following standards,
    > you need a new one. The boss .. well .. try to explain why his wants are
    > contrary to good web practices.


    The point of my post was not debating the advices given. I think they
    are all good practices that any web developer should follow. I just
    wonder how often the 'experts' or professional web developers in this
    group face a situation where they meet resistance when it comes to
    applying those advices.
     
    Daan, Sep 25, 2007
    #3
  4. Daan

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <JI9Ki.135295$>,
    "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <> wrote:

    > Daan wrote:
    >
    > > The reason I ask is that often advice is given against e.g. the use of
    > > frames,

    >
    > "Frames are evil." ..and a general nuisance to maintain as well. There
    > is reason for all the numerous pages describing why. Such as:
    > http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil
    >
    > > against adjusting font sizes

    >
    > No, against *setting* font sizes. Let the visitor decide.
    >
    > > or use of particular fonts,

    >
    > There is no point in assigning an oddball font that your visitors will
    > not have on their computers. Browsers will attempt to fill in with
    > something the computer *does* have, which may be completely different
    > than what you envision. (Or they may screw up really bad if you didn't
    > specify a fallback family.)
    >
    > > or all kinds of 'general' best practices,

    >
    > ..such as accessibilty, useability...
    >


    Not sure what above has to do with OP's question? I reckon you
    just simply could not resist the spiel. It must feel too good to
    give it. <g>

    > > but I can imagine that your designer, your client or your boss might
    > > disagree.

    >
    > If your 'designer' disagrees with the practice of following standards,
    > you need a new one. The boss .. well .. try to explain why his wants are
    > contrary to good web practices.


    Now you are talking. I can add to the above good advice that if
    you are having insurmountable difficulty in a commercial
    situation (where you have a boss) getting cooperation on such
    things then you might consider becoming an independent
    contractor. That way, you call the shots much more. If you are in
    control of the whole process, well... Bob is a closer relative
    than he might be, he could even be your uncle.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 25, 2007
    #4
  5. dorayme wrote:

    > "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
    >> Daan wrote:
    >>> or all kinds of 'general' best practices,

    >>
    >> ..such as accessibilty, usability...

    >
    > Not sure what above has to do with OP's question? I reckon you just
    > simply could not resist the spiel.


    What????
    Accessibility and usability are not general best practices? :)

    > It must feel too good to give it. <g>


    That too. <lol>

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Sep 26, 2007
    #5
  6. Daan

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <2fhKi.598684$>,
    "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <> wrote:

    > > Not sure what above has to do with OP's question? I reckon you just
    > > simply could not resist the spiel.

    >
    > What????


    What you said was correct but not really relevant to OPs
    question. His question assumed the employee/author knew this
    stuff.

    > Accessibility and usability are not general best practices? :)
    >


    They are. You are right. But it is not relevant. I know,
    amazingly, what is best practice is not always spot on relevant
    to all questions. <g>

    > > It must feel too good to give it. <g>

    >
    > That too. <lol>


    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 26, 2007
    #6
  7. Scripsit dorayme:

    > What you said was correct but not really relevant to OPs
    > question. His question assumed the employee/author knew this
    > stuff.


    When we know that the implicit assumptions of a question are wrong, then it
    is surely relevant to address them. You might decide not to answer at all,
    but if you do, why would you answer under assumptions that are known to be
    wrong?

    It is virtually certain that the employee or author does not know "this
    stuff". If you read the original question with open eyes, this should become
    obvious.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Sep 26, 2007
    #7
  8. Daan

    asdf Guest

    "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote in message
    news:eRlKi.228892$...
    > Scripsit dorayme:
    >
    >> What you said was correct but not really relevant to OPs
    >> question. His question assumed the employee/author knew this
    >> stuff.

    >
    > When we know that the implicit assumptions of a question are wrong, then
    > it is surely relevant to address them. You might decide not to answer at
    > all, but if you do, why would you answer under assumptions that are known
    > to be wrong?
    >
    > It is virtually certain that the employee or author does not know "this
    > stuff". If you read the original question with open eyes, this should
    > become obvious.
    >
    > --
    > Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    > http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/


    for once, i agree with jukka :)) Nice one!
     
    asdf, Sep 26, 2007
    #8
  9. Daan

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 26 Sep 2007 05:32:39
    GMT asdf scribed:

    >> When we know that the implicit assumptions of a question are wrong,
    >> then it is surely relevant to address them. You might decide not to
    >> answer at all, but if you do, why would you answer under assumptions
    >> that are known to be wrong?
    >>
    >> It is virtually certain that the employee or author does not know
    >> "this stuff". If you read the original question with open eyes, this
    >> should become obvious.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    >> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

    >
    > for once, i agree with jukka :)) Nice one!


    I'll bet it doesn't become a habit...

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
     
    Neredbojias, Sep 26, 2007
    #9
  10. On Sep 25, 10:36 am, Daan <> wrote:
    > A question for the regulars / experts in this group...


    hmmmm....

    > what does your
    > implementation process look like? I mean...


    The "best practices" are completely dependent on the project.

    > So, how often can you implement all of the best practices?


    Well since they can change with every project, we implement them every
    time. Don't look for a set of rules that you use every time no matter
    what the situation. Each project in unique, and the "best practices"
    for that project are equally unique.
     
    Travis Newbury, Sep 26, 2007
    #10
  11. Daan

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On 25 Sep, 15:36, Daan <> wrote:
    > A question for the regulars / experts in this group: what does your
    > implementation process look like?


    I work with several processes, depending on the client.


    Work with a "web dezyner" who wears trainers and glasses far more
    fashionable than anything I own. They provide a Photoshop PSD that
    looks good 1. At one resolution, 2. For perfect vision, 3. On a Mac
    display.

    I then code this, and bludgeon the design until it can be persuaded to
    look approximately like the original (sometimes I simply lie and swap
    the old PSDs for new screenshots. They never notice...). I try to
    achieve this with the least compromise for accessibilty, validity and
    general good working practices. None of these are rewarded in the
    typical world of "design", because they're simply not understood.

    Then we spend the final hours (often very many hours) breaking both
    the design and the implementation to meet the last minute
    requirements: more ads on the page until it's unreadable. Sponsor's
    official colour schema of octarine and tetragrammaton. Making a font
    _exactly_ a bit bigger than 10 pixels, and a bit less than 11 pixels.
    And that old favourite, making it render perfectly and identically on
    the CEO's only two browsers, IE5/Mac and NS4.


    Secondly I work in Java shops. Why use two lines of CSS when a 100
    lines of JSP will do the job instead? After all, "web design doesn't
    really count as proper coding" so why learn about worthless trivia
    like accessibility, standards-validity and cross-platform support.
    After all, the contract specifies "IE6 only", so if the customer
    suffers an IE7 auto-update in the future and the site crashes, that's
    their fault.


    Sometimes I even work in the charitable sector, where a well-meaning
    semi-retired polytechnic lecturer with a ripped-off copy of
    FrontPlague can destroy a well-designed site because: they've infinite
    9-5 time to spend on it (drinking their part-time employer's coffee
    between lectures), when you're trying to scratch a few hours after
    midnight, when you can. You can't even mention this, because "we
    mustn't upset the volunteers".
     
    Andy Dingley, Sep 26, 2007
    #11
  12. Daan

    William Gill Guest

    Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
    > When we know that the implicit assumptions of a question are wrong, then
    > it is surely relevant to address them. You might decide not to answer at
    > all, but if you do, why would you answer under assumptions that are
    > known to be wrong?


    OK, I'll bite. I have tried to read it with open eyes, and though it
    raises serious questions, I can't find the confirmation. What am I missing?

    I agree, it surely is relevant to challenge them, rather than ignore them.

    >
    > It is virtually certain that the employee or author does not know "this
    > stuff". If you read the original question with open eyes, this should
    > become obvious.
    >


    At least the OP is aware that "this stuff" exists. It's even possible
    the OP does know, but lacks the confidence to make a successful argument
    in their favor.

    If I were to try to guess anything, I'd guess frustrated, feeling
    powerless, and probably unhappy, but I'm not qualified to make such
    guesses, and none of them have anything to do with CSS or HTML.
     
    William Gill, Sep 26, 2007
    #12
  13. Daan

    dorayme Guest

    In article <eRlKi.228892$>,
    "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote:

    > Scripsit dorayme:
    >
    > > What you said was correct but not really relevant to OPs
    > > question. His question assumed the employee/author knew this
    > > stuff.

    >
    > When we know that the implicit assumptions of a question are wrong, then it
    > is surely relevant to address them. You might decide not to answer at all,
    > but if you do, why would you answer under assumptions that are known to be
    > wrong?
    >
    > It is virtually certain that the employee or author does not know "this
    > stuff". If you read the original question with open eyes, this should become
    > obvious.


    First, understand that I did not mean to imply that B did
    anything real bad in so responding. Just that the details of
    accessibility were not what were particularly relevant. The
    crucial sentence of the OP was:

    "The reason I ask is that often advice is given against e.g. the
    use of frames, against adjusting font sizes or use of particular
    fonts, or all kinds of 'general' best practices, but I can
    imagine that your designer, your client or your boss might
    disagree.

    So, how often can you implement all of the best practices?"

    Which very much looks like how to deal with folk who need to be
    dealt with in the construction of a web site. B (and I) did
    address this a little too.

    It is irrelevant whether the OP does or not know what best
    practice is in the actual finished pages. So it does not matter
    if the post was read with open eyes or half closed ones. It still
    does not make it relevant to write about the actual rules of good
    website construction.

    Just by the way, the OP himself followed up soon after my post
    and said as much....

    (I see his post was before mine in time now that i dig it out of
    this on-line reader):

    "The point of my post was not debating the advices given. I think
    they all good practices that any web developer should follow. I
    just wonder how often the 'experts' or professional web
    developers in this group face a situation where they meet
    resistance when it comes to applying those advices."

    Hoy ASDF! in my search for original posts, I see yours.

    "for once, I agree with jukka :)) Nice one!"

    Please revise this and have an agreement with JK something to
    look forward to in the future. You are backing the wrong horse
    here.

    I have booked a Supreme Court venue to thrash this super
    important matter out further. We will all gather and talk and
    speak to motions. Then we will all rush off to the pub and get
    drunk, followed by some informal soccer on the beach at Coogee.
    And then a dunk in the water to sober up.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 26, 2007
    #13
  14. Daan

    Daan Guest

    On Sep 26, 6:06 pm, Andy Dingley <> wrote:
    > On 25 Sep, 15:36, Daan <> wrote:
    >
    > > A question for the regulars / experts in this group: what does your
    > > implementation process look like?

    >
    > I work with several processes, depending on the client.
    >
    > Work with a "web dezyner" who wears trainers and glasses far more
    > fashionable than anything I own. They provide a Photoshop PSD that
    > looks good 1. At one resolution, 2. For perfect vision, 3. On a Mac
    > display.
    >
    > I then code this, and bludgeon the design until it can be persuaded to
    > look approximately like the original (sometimes I simply lie and swap
    > the old PSDs for new screenshots. They never notice...). I try to
    > achieve this with the least compromise for accessibilty, validity and
    > general good working practices. None of these are rewarded in the
    > typical world of "design", because they're simply not understood.


    So the interesting part is: what is "approximately" and what is "least
    compromise"? If the 'dezyner' wants the body font smaller, do you
    agree and adjust the css template (using em, not pt of course), or do
    you argue to keep the font size 100%? If the dezyner insists on using
    Verdana, do you specify Verdana or stick with another font? If the
    dezyner has created a fixed width layout, do you implement it as such,
    or make it fluid / liquid?

    I don't ask these questions to get them answered, but to indicate that
    it is difficult to find the right balance there. With my original
    question, I intended to find out whether the majority on this groups
    says "always stick to the absolute best practices", "see the best
    practices as guidelines and apply them appropriately, when possible"
    or "guidelines are nice, but I just do as the designer / boss / client
    tells me to do".
     
    Daan, Sep 27, 2007
    #14
  15. Daan

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On 27 Sep, 11:50, Daan <> wrote:

    > If the 'dezyner' wants the body font smaller, do you
    > agree and adjust the css template (using em, not pt of course), or do
    > you argue to keep the font size 100%?


    I don't recall every having this issue (exactly as you describe).

    A designer who understands "pt" can be educated to understand that
    "em" are more appropriate. They sometimes insist on aiming below .67em
    for "legalese", but I let that slip as no-one using the site will
    care. If they've got this far though, you can usually get across the
    concept that "bodytext" (not necessarily <body>) should be at the
    users' chosen defaults.

    The problem is with the ones who can only think about pixels and have
    _no_ understanding of web platform accessibility. The "must look
    identical everywhere" advocates.

    To be honest, I'd rather just not work with these people. Leave them
    to it. If they think that the web is the same as printed paper, then
    leave them to stew in it. The site content is probably just trivial
    marketing crap anyway. Let them use Flash, they'd be happier that way.
    That site's effective absence from the accessible web just isn't a
    measurable loss to the sum total of human knowledge.

    If the site has real content and the designer is a fixed-pixel
    obsessive, then I blatantly lie and cheat to fool them. Code it at
    100% as it ought to be, demonstrate it as paper printouts only with a
    carefully-chosen default size to make it "fit", and never allow a
    meeting to happen in a meeting room that has a working browser in it.
    Block their laptop's IP from the web server if you have to.

    It's surprisingly easy to do this. If they're dumb enough to still
    think that fixed pixel design is a good idea, they're dumb enough to
    hoodwink.

    > If the dezyner insists on using
    > Verdana, do you specify Verdana or stick with another font?


    I don't recall a dezyner who used Verdana (Macs!). Verdana is the
    province of the self-taught PC-user web designer who's blindly copying
    examples pulled from the web without any understanding. If you point
    out that there _is_ a probelm with it, they're generally educable.
    Otherwise just slip Trebuchet (AFAIR) in, because the typeface glyphs
    are indistinguishable apart form the sizing issue.

    If you're feeling particularly arsey, stick your prototypes under a
    project directory named /tschichold/ and only tell them the name
    verbally. If they've got any right to be looking, they'll know how to
    spell it.


    > If the
    > dezyner has created a fixed width layout, do you implement it as such,
    > or make it fluid / liquid?


    Fluid. Every time. Show them paper snapshots of a dead website iif you
    have to, or flip your desktop resolution to 800x600 for the meeting's
    duration so that they never notice it also works perfectly well at
    other resolutions. Full-screen your browser and they'll not even try
    to change the window size. Those smart enough to do that will have
    understood the benefits of a fluid design.


    > I don't ask these questions to get them answered, but to indicate that
    > it is difficult to find the right balance there.


    I'd like to know why these idiots still have jobs.
     
    Andy Dingley, Sep 27, 2007
    #15
  16. Daan

    William Gill Guest

    Andy Dingley wrote:

    > The problem is with the ones who can only think about pixels and have
    > _no_ understanding of web platform accessibility. The "must look
    > identical everywhere" advocates.
    >


    It's been my experience that the computer monitor is too similar to the
    little box in so many family rooms (TV). Some people are used to total
    control of the medium in print, and the TV screen is just electronic
    paper. So I begin by emphasizing that the web is a new medium,
    requiring a new standard.

    Even my least tech savvy clients can grasp the concept that each
    individual custom builds every web page that they view, consciously or
    not, through their choice of display dimensions, color depth, etc.
    Without numbing their brain (too much), I show how these differences are
    not like the difference between a 17" TV and a 54" TV. I usually say
    that HTML is contains a set "suggestions", but the individual has the
    final say.

    > To be honest, I'd rather just not work with these people.


    Who does? Some of us have the luxury of not working with people we
    don't always see eye to eye with. I doubt that is universal.

    >
    > If the site has real content and the designer is a fixed-pixel
    > obsessive, then I blatantly lie and cheat to fool them. Code it at
    > 100% as it ought to be, demonstrate it as paper printouts only with a
    > carefully-chosen default size to make it "fit", and never allow a
    > meeting to happen in a meeting room that has a working browser in it.
    > Block their laptop's IP from the web server if you have to.
    >
    > It's surprisingly easy to do this. If they're dumb enough to still
    > think that fixed pixel design is a good idea, they're dumb enough to
    > hoodwink.
    >


    I guess that's one approach, though it strikes me as a bit extreme. Not
    to mention what says about my relationship if I have to "hoodwink" my
    client, or their agent.

    I usually point out that they wouldn't select content that could
    alienate, or even offended potential customers, why use design
    techniques that could. If I'm unsuccessful, or if I feel we can't come
    to an amicable understanding, I'm back to "I'd rather just not work with
    these people." It doesn't do me, or them any good to do something that
    I believe is against their best interests. My professional integrity is
    part of why the hired me in the first place.

    My biggest challenge comes from third parties who's artistic intent is
    in conflict with the medium. From the client's perspective we just have
    a difference of opinion. I've even had one of these "artists" use
    javascript to resize the browser window "to maintain the proper aspect
    ratio." Talk about a rude entrance to a website!

    I haven't gotten to the point of "give me fluid design, or give me
    death" (my apologies to Patric Henry fans). I can come to terms with
    some "semi-fixed" layouts, as long as they don't have to declare "best
    viewed in..., or on..., or with...", and as long as the inherent
    negatives don't overwhelm the positives. I've even seen some
    interesting discussions on the effect line length on perception and
    usability. That might argue in favor of a more fixed layout, at least
    in it's outer envelope.
     
    William Gill, Sep 27, 2007
    #16
  17. Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Daan <>
    writing in news::

    > A question for the regulars / experts in this group: what does your
    > implementation process look like?


    I have a boss that I have been "working" with for many years. From
    someone who wanted to have pop-unders (http://tinyurl.com/ysnmf8) to
    someone who sent a list of validation errors the "deziner" for one of
    her charities, it's been a long, slow ride.

    She still uses IE6, and I think she feels like it's like an old pair of
    slippers, comfortable for her, but full of holes and threadbare. Still
    insists that any link off site has to be opened in a new window. I'm
    gradually weaning her over to FF (Opera is just too confusing for her at
    this point), and when I do, I will introduce mouse gestures - new
    windows for off site links will then disappear.

    She understands that sites are not going to look exactly the same across
    browsers. She has a really good eye for color and balance. She thinks
    that I'm too concerned about Everyone being able to use a site - she
    says that who ever you are trying to reach is all you have to worry
    about, and that the percentage of others is too low to worry about.

    When doing a site, I usually get colors from her. Then I make a lorum
    ipsum page with the CSS in the style element. We go back and forth
    until we both agree it looks good, and then I start doing the back end.
    Depending on the complexity, a few more days of development and testing,
    and then time for one more approval before it goes onto a production
    server. She's happy, and proud to tell others that her site works
    across browsers, doesn't have validation errors, and thanks to her,
    looks good.



    --
    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 27, 2007
    #17
  18. Daan

    SpaceGirl Guest

    On Sep 27, 1:06 pm, Andy Dingley <> wrote:
    > On 27 Sep, 11:50, Daan <> wrote:
    >
    > > If the 'dezyner' wants the body font smaller, do you
    > > agree and adjust the css template (using em, not pt of course), or do
    > > you argue to keep the font size 100%?

    >
    > I don't recall every having this issue (exactly as you describe).
    >
    > A designer who understands "pt" can be educated to understand that
    > "em" are more appropriate. They sometimes insist on aiming below .67em
    > for "legalese", but I let that slip as no-one using the site will
    > care. If they've got this far though, you can usually get across the
    > concept that "bodytext" (not necessarily <body>) should be at the
    > users' chosen defaults.
    >
    > The problem is with the ones who can only think about pixels and have
    > _no_ understanding of web platform accessibility. The "must look
    > identical everywhere" advocates.
    >
    > To be honest, I'd rather just not work with these people. Leave them
    > to it. If they think that the web is the same as printed paper, then
    > leave them to stew in it. The site content is probably just trivial
    > marketing crap anyway. Let them use Flash, they'd be happier that way.
    > That site's effective absence from the accessible web just isn't a
    > measurable loss to the sum total of human knowledge.
    >
    > If the site has real content and the designer is a fixed-pixel
    > obsessive, then I blatantly lie and cheat to fool them. Code it at
    > 100% as it ought to be, demonstrate it as paper printouts only with a
    > carefully-chosen default size to make it "fit", and never allow a
    > meeting to happen in a meeting room that has a working browser in it.
    > Block their laptop's IP from the web server if you have to.
    >
    > It's surprisingly easy to do this. If they're dumb enough to still
    > think that fixed pixel design is a good idea, they're dumb enough to
    > hoodwink.
    >
    > > If the dezyner insists on using
    > > Verdana, do you specify Verdana or stick with another font?

    >
    > I don't recall a dezyner who used Verdana (Macs!). Verdana is the
    > province of the self-taught PC-user web designer who's blindly copying
    > examples pulled from the web without any understanding. If you point
    > out that there _is_ a probelm with it, they're generally educable.
    > Otherwise just slip Trebuchet (AFAIR) in, because the typeface glyphs
    > are indistinguishable apart form the sizing issue.
    >
    > If you're feeling particularly arsey, stick your prototypes under a
    > project directory named /tschichold/ and only tell them the name
    > verbally. If they've got any right to be looking, they'll know how to
    > spell it.
    >
    > > If the
    > > dezyner has created a fixed width layout, do you implement it as such,
    > > or make it fluid / liquid?

    >
    > Fluid. Every time. Show them paper snapshots of a dead website iif you
    > have to, or flip your desktop resolution to 800x600 for the meeting's
    > duration so that they never notice it also works perfectly well at
    > other resolutions. Full-screen your browser and they'll not even try
    > to change the window size. Those smart enough to do that will have
    > understood the benefits of a fluid design.



    What about Flash developers? Fluid has a completely different meaning
    inside Flash (you can work in pixel, if you wish, but everything is
    fluid inside Flash).
     
    SpaceGirl, Sep 27, 2007
    #18
  19. Daan

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On 27 Sep, 15:50, William Gill <> wrote:

    > I guess that's one approach, though it strikes me as a bit extreme.


    That's not extreme.

    Extreme is when my hand-forged steel clueiron really is leaning
    against the side of my desk as I type this.
     
    Andy Dingley, Sep 27, 2007
    #19
  20. Daan

    William Gill Guest

    Andy Dingley wrote:
    > Extreme is when my hand-forged steel clueiron really is leaning
    > against the side of my desk as I type this.
    >

    I did say "a bit"! However, I prefer a wood. :-D
     
    William Gill, Sep 27, 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. Alex
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    409
  2. Sathyaish
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,120
    Sathyaish
    Sep 8, 2005
  3. =?Utf-8?B?Q3JhaWc4MzE=?=
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    994
    Craig Jeffords
    Sep 14, 2005
  4. Sathyaish

    Linkbutton does not look like a linkbutton

    Sathyaish, Sep 8, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net Datagrid Control
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    194
    Sathyaish
    Sep 8, 2005
  5. active
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    284
    active
    Apr 3, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page