OT-Killing Pop-ups as a webmaster

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 15:49:51 GMT, John T wrote:

this has nothing to do with elitism. Your point of view is simple
ingnorance.

No. Jay's point of view is pragmatic. He's a small business owner trying
to advertise his hotel with a minimum of cost using the tools at his
disposal. If he wanted to hire a Siegelgale or one of us professional
developers, I'm sure he'd get validated HTML. As it is, his point of view
is quite correct: If it works, it's good enough. If he's not getting any
complaints from users about the site not loading, why bother fixing what
isn't broken?

He probably will never hear from those.

The fact that users may not be able to view the site and will not complain
about doesn't detract from his desire to produce a web page using simple
tools.

this describes your attitude pretty good (at least regarding your
website; even when you was told why etc.)

And this demonstrates your elitist attitude that Jay was complaining about.
He's made it clear that he's not a developer and he doesn't need to be one.
If one of you professional, validating web developers care to donate your
time to advise him of proper tagging, I'm sure he'd be open to the idea...

I am not a developer (and I am ashamed that my company website is crap; but
I know that it is crap,but in the background I am working on letting it
rebuilt by professionals), but I know what has to be done. And I donate my
time and tell him _*NOW*_.


It apparently had no effect on performance, which,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
in the end, is all that matters.

ah! and how will you know?

How do you know what testing he's done?

Well, when your experience level is on the basis of a user (asking for help
on pop-ups that appear by surfing his own website) then I don't expect him
knowing how to test his website on a lousy modem connection.

Damn. Give the boy a break. He's using low-end tools to minimize costs to
develop a low-profile brochure-ware site. It's not like he's building a
financial management system.

This sounds like "Hey folks, come to my 1st class hotel with suites, I
offer better service than all the chains, but - uh, sorry - marketing is
done by myself. I hardly know what I do on the website, but it somehow
works."
Not using JS for navigation? Hey, it is _so_ cool and nobody complained
except 1 or 2 wakkos, but they are so into 'standards' ...


Hey, I know how to hold a screwdriver. May I do your annual on your plane?

Sorry for sounding harsh ...

#m

--
http://www.declareyourself.com/fyr_candidates.php
http://www.subterrane.com/bush.shtml

"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...

this has nothing to do with elitism. Your point of view is simple
ingnorance.



Jay said that he is learning.
His page looks good, simple, not a lot of flashy crap like a lot of other
pages.
His page loads fast and has no errors.

Back off!
You were a beginner too at one point...

I have no problem with you or anyone using poor (but usable) tools to make
web pages. Obviously a web page with some internal problems problems is
much better than not having a web page.

However! I think it is a very bad idea to take such a sloppily created page
and use it as an example of good HTML code! That's the issue I have.

I did web stuff for something like 10 years and learned (the hard way...)
about browser compatibility.

Peter


"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:28Ltb.213582$Tr4.618517@attbi_s03...
Jay.. I am also learning HTML and MS FrontPage...

Well, Bill, despite Peter's (and others) elitist attitudes toward building
a
web page, this ain't rocket science. Microsoft FrontPage -- for all of
its
quirks -- is head and shoulders above any other web editor I've tried, for
ease of use.

Sure, you can go with Dreamweaver for more "power" -- if you've got a few
weeks of your life to devote to something as stupid as learning a new
program. Nowadays, with PCs as powerful as mainframes once were, there is
simply no reason for a program to be anything but naked-butt simple to
use.
If it's NOT, that's indicative of poor programming design, IMHO.

If you're used to Microsoft Word -- and who isn't nowadays? -- FrontPage
is
very familiar feeling. Much of the data is interchangeable, actually, and
you can share stuff from one program to the other. This really smoothes
the
learning curve, and lets you start producing almost immediately.

which "Theme/Style" did you use to create the left menu with the hover
button added...

My menu style (on the left side of my page) is called "A graphical style
based on the Network theme" -- whatever THAT means. I picked it cuz
everyone says it looks nice! :-)

I write off this whole debate over HTML editors and technique as nothing
more than the "DOS vs Windows" debate, redux. Ten (or was it 15 now?)
years ago, I was the dinosaur, decrying the "stupid PC users who were
using
the new 'Windows' as a crutch". I could be heard grumbling stuff like
"Why don't these idiots learn DOS, instead of forcing this stupid GUI down
our throats?"

Well, I learned that you've gotta keep moving with the technology. Dig
your heels in on something like this, and you'll end up being an expert in
Borland Paradox database design, trapped in a Microsoft Access world.

I know, cuz I AM one of *those*, and it sucks... :-(

And, by the way, FWIW I have deleted all that "table" HTML crap at the
bottom of the opening page. I have no idea what it was, or how it got
there -- nor do I care. It apparently had no effect on performance,
which,
in the end, is all that matters.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
et...

I did web stuff for something like 10 years and learned (the hard way...)
about browser compatibility.



I'm running IE 6.0.2800.1106 and www.AlexisParkInn.com looks and works fine
for me.

How about the other people here? Is it compatiable with your browser?

I believe that is the latest version.


"Chuck" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
et...

I did web stuff for something like 10 years and learned (the hard
way...)
about browser compatibility.



I'm running IE 6.0.2800.1106 and www.AlexisParkInn.com looks and works
fine
for me.

How about the other people here? Is it compatiable with your browser?

Chuck wrote:

How about the other people here? Is it compatiable with your browser?

Netscape 4.79. Most of the stuff is lots better than the last time we did this
exercise. The renovation photos page comes up blank, but will appear correctly
if I hit "reload" or transition elsewhere and back up into it.

George Patterson
They say nothing's certain except death and taxes. The thing is, death
doesn't get worse every time Congress goes into session.

"Chuck" wrote in
nk.net:

How about the other people here? Is it compatiable with your browser?

(1) Opera 7.20
(2) No.

(1) Netscape 7.1
(2) No.

(1) MSIE 6.0.2800.1106
(2) Yes. (Surprise)

--
John Godwin
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT from email address)

Front page is a good program, I use it and I know alot of others who use it, I
know some people who use dream weaver and liked to argue that it was better, but
they are basically the same, if something works no need to change to anything
else.

Jay Honeck wrote:

It apparently had no effect on performance, which,
in the end, is all that matters.

exactly

Jay Honeck wrote:

Jay.. I am also learning HTML and MS FrontPage...

Well, Bill, despite Peter's (and others) elitist attitudes toward building
a
web page, this ain't rocket science. Microsoft FrontPage -- for all of
its quirks -- is head and shoulders above any other web editor I've tried,
for ease of use.

Sure, you can go with Dreamweaver for more "power" -- if you've got a few
weeks of your life to devote to something as stupid as learning a new
program. Nowadays, with PCs as powerful as mainframes once were, there is
simply no reason for a program to be anything but naked-butt simple to
use. If it's NOT, that's indicative of poor programming design, IMHO.

I understand (and agree) that learning to use new software can be a pain. In
this case however there is a different issue involved besides whose
software is better.

It is certainly in your best interests to produce web pages that conform to
standards. By settling for "good enough" you ignore a growing trend of
people using alternatives to MS software. Many people are opting to run
other browsers on MS not to mention other OS's (Linux, Mac) altogether.

I use Mozilla (or Konquerer) on Linux. As a result I encounter many sites
that do not conform and are therefore unavailable to me. If it's something
like the video clips you link to it's not too big of a deal, although I
would like to view them. But if I'm trying to make travel plans then your
place is skipped and we both lose. (Fortunately I am able to see most of
your site without trouble. Besides, if I ever have to travel in your neck
of the woods I won't need a browser to book a room.)

On more of a philosophical note, the internet works because users and
providers _cooperate_ on protocols. Tolerance of non-conforming sites hurts
us all. I submit that one cannot continue to _knowingly_ publish
non-conforming pages and be a good internet 'citizen'.


--
Frank....H

I find it fascinating that you say:

On more of a philosophical note, the internet works because users and
providers _cooperate_ on protocols. Tolerance of non-conforming sites
hurts
us all.

Yet admit:

I use Mozilla (or Konquerer) on Linux. As a result I encounter many sites
that do not conform and are therefore unavailable to me.

I don't mean to sound rude, but if the sites are invisible to you because of
YOUR choice of browser, how is this anyone's problem but yours?

Blaming the website, when it is clearly a limitation of your browser, is
illogical.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"