![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
flexagonI've spent a bunch of this weekend reading about web standards and CSS... Jeffrey Zeldman's book, which is a little less about the how and more about the why, but pretty educational in both respects for a non-CSS person. All I really have to say is, last time I learned a bit about CSS I completely missed the point. I thought it was about applying a similar look to a lot of web pages at once, something I don't want to do on my site... and it's often used that way. But the other thing it's about, really about, is entirely separating the structure of the content from the presentation. If you don't know what I mean and don't want to think too hard, click over to the CSS Zen Garden for a moment. Pretty impressive, huh?
Of course, with knowledge comes embarrassment. My site... well, it's an okay site, and it gets better every couple of years. Last time around it even got a CSS rule, a little inline tweak for a visual effect. However, it's not exactly the site you'd expect from a professional web developer, and for better or worse that's what I am now. I should be living up to it. So, I played a bit today with getting my front page to validate according to W3C, and I r-e-a-l-l-y want to clean up the rest. Of course, this will wind up meaning that a lot gets a rewrite, because I won't be able to tweak the presentation without noticing that some of the content is old enough to be attending first or second grade.
I've also, overnight, become a lot more sensitive to the idea of people viewing pages with CSS and/or JavaScript and/or images turned off. (It's not just for the visually impaired -- mobile readers often want to see the bare bones of a page too.)
This for instance:
Nothing really seems to have changed since the days of basic HTML, in terms of automated tools churning out dreck. Look at that alt text (lots of browsers will give you this in a tooltip if you hover your mouse over the image). It's clearly generated by some tool or other, taking what's meant to be an accessibility aid and filling it with... um... the file name of the image. Mhc2Ts1701! Thanks, tool, that's so helpful that I'm half tempted to take the Yarn Harlot to task for using you. (And by the way, you non-knitters, look at that piece of knitting on top. Aren't you the tiniest bit curious to know how those braids and textures and diamonds are all emerging simultaneously from that innocent row of loops on the knitting needle? Don't you think I'm even a little bit cool for knowing?)
Anyway, I'm rather happy to be getting back into web development now instead of being in it continuously for the last 10 years. It seems like I missed out on a really crappy time to be in the field, and it's all getting better again now. Next up: at some point I'll have to look at JavaScript, and someday maybe I'll even figure out how![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
webrat's Macromedia stuff fits into all this. :)
Of course, with knowledge comes embarrassment. My site... well, it's an okay site, and it gets better every couple of years. Last time around it even got a CSS rule, a little inline tweak for a visual effect. However, it's not exactly the site you'd expect from a professional web developer, and for better or worse that's what I am now. I should be living up to it. So, I played a bit today with getting my front page to validate according to W3C, and I r-e-a-l-l-y want to clean up the rest. Of course, this will wind up meaning that a lot gets a rewrite, because I won't be able to tweak the presentation without noticing that some of the content is old enough to be attending first or second grade.
I've also, overnight, become a lot more sensitive to the idea of people viewing pages with CSS and/or JavaScript and/or images turned off. (It's not just for the visually impaired -- mobile readers often want to see the bare bones of a page too.)
This for instance:
Nothing really seems to have changed since the days of basic HTML, in terms of automated tools churning out dreck. Look at that alt text (lots of browsers will give you this in a tooltip if you hover your mouse over the image). It's clearly generated by some tool or other, taking what's meant to be an accessibility aid and filling it with... um... the file name of the image. Mhc2Ts1701! Thanks, tool, that's so helpful that I'm half tempted to take the Yarn Harlot to task for using you. (And by the way, you non-knitters, look at that piece of knitting on top. Aren't you the tiniest bit curious to know how those braids and textures and diamonds are all emerging simultaneously from that innocent row of loops on the knitting needle? Don't you think I'm even a little bit cool for knowing?)
Anyway, I'm rather happy to be getting back into web development now instead of being in it continuously for the last 10 years. It seems like I missed out on a really crappy time to be in the field, and it's all getting better again now. Next up: at some point I'll have to look at JavaScript, and someday maybe I'll even figure out how
webrat's Macromedia stuff fits into all this. :)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-01-22 12:29 am (UTC)If you have any questions for me for HTML/CSS/JS/CF, by all means, ask.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-22 02:11 am (UTC)So yeah, I'm wondering how it fits in with the new pantheon. Would love to know, even if I won't be really getting into it.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-22 04:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-22 11:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-22 12:46 am (UTC)If only I could convince my workplace to graduate beyond the most basic of standards. They are seriously, seriously concerned about going to a resolution higher than 640 x 480, and nothing any tech, designer, or marketing person can do (including showing them a printable full-screen page) can convince them otherwise.
The neatest website in the world to the head of our department, the one they would like to see our website (state archives/history department) resemble is ...
Amazon.com.
Just not too wide. People need to be able to print, you know.
*facepalm*
no subject
Date: 2008-01-22 02:07 am (UTC)Amazon... shudder. Have you seen Amazon Light?
*goes off to BOPshop to check your source*
Nice alt tags.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-22 04:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-22 02:50 pm (UTC)Yes, exactly. We've shown them this. Then the particular person begins talking about how third world countries with old browsers need to be able to read our site and you realize that nothing you say will help.
no subject
Date: 2008-01-22 04:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-01-22 05:21 am (UTC)btw... regarding alt=""
Date: 2008-01-22 06:19 pm (UTC)http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200412/the_alt_and_title_attributes/
http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200604/alt_text_is_an_alternative_not_a_tooltip/