Nav menu suggestions?

[Michael Laplante]

The site I'm re-designing has 52 menu items. Right now these are organized
over three levels. The issue is that every menuing option I've looked at
uses Javascript and IE 6 doesn't like that. A warning comes up about
blocking "active content." A menu gives the option to allow blocked content
but immediately below that is an item marked "What's the risk?"

My concern is that people may have javascript turned off, or "Internet Lite"
users may be nervous about allowing the blocked content -- in which case
they'll never see the menu.

I've thought of:
i. iframes but I don't think these are supported beyond the last generation
of browsers;
ii. a site map but that introduces one extra step everytime someone wants to
go to a different location;
iii. some sort of warning on the front page to the effect that "this site
uses a javascript for menu purposes, so make sure you have it turned on."

I can't be the first person to encounter this. What have people here done to
work around it.

BTW, thanks to Toby Inkster for the Suckerfish resourse -- however, it needs
javascript to run on IE6.

M

 

[Neredbojias]

To further the education of mankind, "Michael Laplante"

The site I'm re-designing has 52 menu items. Right now these are
organized over three levels. The issue is that every menuing option
I've looked at uses Javascript and IE 6 doesn't like that. A warning
comes up about blocking "active content." A menu gives the option to
allow blocked content but immediately below that is an item marked
"What's the risk?"

Do you really need to do something in script to have the menu work the
way you want it to?

My concern is that people may have javascript turned off, or "Internet
Lite" users may be nervous about allowing the blocked content -- in
which case they'll never see the menu.

The "active content" default in IE is an ill-advised choice on MS's part,
but big surprise. A legitimate concern is that a fair number of users do
turn javascript off because it has been abused in the past by some very
ignorant and unethical site spoilers. For that reason, navigation should
never rely on script; if used at all, script should only enhanced the
operation of a viable stand-alone system.

I've thought of:
i. iframes but I don't think these are supported beyond the last
generation of browsers;
ii. a site map but that introduces one extra step everytime someone
wants to go to a different location;
iii. some sort of warning on the front page to the effect that "this
site uses a javascript for menu purposes, so make sure you have it
turned on."

If I _had to_ pick one of the 3 options, I'd probably do i. iii isn't a
solution, anyway.

I can't be the first person to encounter this. What have people here
done to work around it.

Re-designed to a more operable page.

BTW, thanks to Toby Inkster for the Suckerfish resourse -- however, it
needs javascript to run on IE6.

Toby can be aloof and choleric, but if that's your way of saying "Thanks
for all the fish," I think he'll be pleased.

 

[Michael Laplante]

To further the education of mankind, "Michael Laplante"
<[email protected]> vouchsafed:

Do you really need to do something in script to have the menu work the
way you want it to?

Suckerfish -- as Toby suggested -- would work terrific, if not for that damn
IE thing.

For that reason, navigation should
never rely on script; if used at all, script should only enhanced the
operation of a viable stand-alone system.

52 items makes any sort of a "list" unworkable.

If I _had to_ pick one of the 3 options, I'd probably do i. iii isn't a
solution, anyway.

Thx for the input. 52 items might even make that option unwieldy -- I'll
have to play around for a bit.

Toby can be aloof and choleric

?! I find him one of the more non-judgemental, helpful people here -- can't
say I've ever seen a cranky response from him.

M

 

[Toby Inkster]

?! I find him one of the more non-judgemental, helpful people here -- can't
say I've ever seen a cranky response from him.

You must have caught me on a good day. The solution to your problem is
thus...

A menu (such as suckerfish) looks roughly like this:

[Foo] [Bar] [Baz] [Quux] [Xyzzy]

where each thing in square brackets has a hover effect that drops down a
list of links. In IE, if Javascript is disabled that list won't appear.
However, with clever site design, that need not be an issue.

Why? Because you can make those words (Foo, Bar, etc) into links, which
when clicked on bring up a partial site map for that section of the site.
That is, when clicking on "Foo", a page comes up that says:

* [Foo Flibble]
* [Foo Flobble]
* [Foo Flubble]

The effect won't be quite as nice for people with Javascript, but all
pages will still be accessible to them.

 

[Michael Laplante]

You must have caught me on a good day. The solution to your problem is
thus...

Sort of mini-sitemaps for the relevant section. . . something to consider.
.. .

M

 

[Jonathan N. Little]

Suckerfish -- as Toby suggested -- would work terrific, if not for that damn
IE thing.

Then use MS's HTC file to attached the behavior on IE
Vladdy has an article:

http://www.vladdy.net/Demos/IEPseudoClassesFix.html

 

[Michael Laplante]

I had a quick look and will delve into it more deeply. My initial response
though is to wonder if this will overcome the IE6 warning thing. Wouldn't a
call to an external javascript still cause the "warning bells?"

M

 

[Neredbojias]

To further the education of mankind, "Michael Laplante"

Suckerfish -- as Toby suggested -- would work terrific, if not for
that damn IE thing.

Suckerfish... Apparently you're seeking an inline list with dropdown
sublists?

52 items makes any sort of a "list" unworkable.

Not true. I don't think this is what you want, but have a quick gander at
my homepage (which is nothing but a big list capable of hundreds or even
thousands of items.):

http://www.neredbojias.com/

?! I find him one of the more non-judgemental, helpful people here --
can't say I've ever seen a cranky response from him.

I did not mean to suggest he was unhelpful or pedantic, or that he wasn't a
really nice guy under the curious facade. "Odd" might have been a better
descriptor.