Iman Mayes on Fri, 11 Oct 2002 22:30:05 -0400 |
Thanks for the anybrowser.org link. It looks like something that will come in handy! Iman Mayes ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason" <jason@nocks.com> To: <plug@lists.phillylinux.org> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 4:27 PM Subject: Re: [PLUG] PLUG Website Maintenence > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Thursday 10 October 2002 10H:21, gabriel rosenkoetter wrote: > <lengthy snippage> > > Oh, what a long, strange thread it's been... Just caught up with it earlier > today. I'll try to toss in my $.02 without heating things up further. > > I tend to agree with most of gabriel's points in this thread. And, I do use > graphical web-browsers most of the time. Generally, Konqueror or Mozilla. > I've had to use IE and Netscape many times in the past as well. However, > there are occasions where I'm working remotely and still want to browse the > web just for a piece of information, and I do rely on text-only utilities > like Lynx. So, it may not be the tool I use all of the time, but I hate > running into sites that were not designed with accessibility in mind when I > do use it. > > Also, I have a PDA that very few other people have (Rex 6000) that is supposed > to sync w/ the web. If I get that feature working, it will likely be with > help from other open source developers and will be largely text-based. The > Plug website would certainly be one of the websites of interest to me if I > did get this working. > > A couple of points here: > 1) Very glad to see some interest in working on the website. I hope the > lengthy discussion doesn't spoil your enthusiasm. > > 2) I have not seen a reference to the "Viewable with Any Browser" campaign. > Check it out at: > http://www.anybrowser.org/campaign/ > If someone else already mentioned it, sorry for the repost. > > I believe this campaign has been going on for at least 6-7 years, and is still > quite important, particularly in the light of this thread. The main point is > that web pages should be designed with accessibility in mind, not targeting > specific browsers. We are trying to get away from the days when you needed to > be running one or two specific applications to get access to the information > you are seeking out. The GNU/Linux/BSD community is generally particularly > sensitive to this point. > > 3) I have seen a "what's wrong with browser detects" type of question posted. > 1st, go check out the "Viewable with Any Browser" campaign mentioned above. > This question is addressed in detail. 2nd, what would be the definitive list > of browsers? Would you include utilities like LWP, web-archiving utilities, > etc.? > > What about tools that haven't been created yet? What if I worked on a new > utility tomorrow (see my PDA above)? If I did so, I'd try to stick to the W3C > standards as much as possible. Shouldn't the pages do the same? It's almost > impossible to try to put together a list and target every possible different > type and version of browser individually. You end up falling back to needing > at least one version that works for _most browsers_ that *can't be > anticipated*. > > The work spent tailoring a page or entire site to look at its best with just a > couple of browsers' extensions is largely wasted effort. If that is what's > desired, you are better off creating a PDF document. You can create a much > more controlled look-and-feel, layout, etc. Instead, just make the version > that works for _most browsers_ the *only version* and make it work for _all > browsers_. That doesn't mean it can't have a clean, well-organized, and > attractive design. As others have said, HTML is intended to allow designing > pages for a broad range of platforms, and standard-compliant HTML should > degrade gracefully. Most newer standards-compliant look-and-feel development > is done with CSS. Again, limit this where it's not really necessary. > > The content comes first. Then comes organizing the content. The last, but > still important point, is attractive look and feel. Just don't make the last > priority get in the way of the first two. > > 4) Also, there was a previous post from "multiple seriousity" that offered a > number of good points to keep in mind for web design. There were some good > points in there, some of which haven't been mentioned recently. In > particular, I think it's important to try to establish URLs over time (finer > granularity than just phillylinux.org) that remain around while the content > may change. > > For example, http://www.PhillyLinux.org/meetings.html should probably always > be a valid URL that will bring up the current list of meetings, etc. That > doesn't mean you need to preserve the old design of that page after a > redesign, but rather all reasonable efforts should be made to make sure that > the URL is always valid and current. > > 5) Size and speed of graphics has been implied. Again, accessibility is > important. Not everyone has DSL/cable modems/satellite/etc. Not everyone has > a T-1 in their basement. Graphics should not be large. The site should load > quickly, even over slower connections. Graphics should not get in the way of > getting at the content. That doesn't mean they can't exist, just don't go > overboard with them. > > Cheers, > Jason Nocks > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQE9pzQo3CryLfCgqRkRAvPuAJ4yikHUEYIvAHMwAbPX2d91S3vZjwCfbmDS > W8ZDLRHXWTR+kxGKXtLVScY= > =+ev+ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _________________________________________________________________________ > Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org > Announcements - http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce > General Discussion -- http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug > _________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.netisland.net/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|