A tale of two sites

By one of those coincidences that crop up on occasion two interior designers asked me what I thought of their sites.
http://www.bdeponteves.fr/ and http://www.bo-decoration.fr

They seem to be single page Flash sites not built to web standards (no doc type etc.) so one concern (of many) was indexing. I turned Java script off to see how they looked sans Flash - bo-decoration did as expected and degraded (ungracefully in my view) but bdeponteves kept soldiering on. It disappeared completely when in Safari I disabled plug-ins (not an option I could find in Firefox). I also noted that the text in bdeponteves can be copied and pasted so presumably is html? I also saw in the source code a reference to ‘AC_RunActiveContent.js’

Can anyone shed a light on the difference between these two sites. Any info might back my argument to have them rebuilt - preferably by me in FW without Flash.

Regards Richard


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Personally, I find the “bd” site very old looking and, well, just not attractive at all. It doesn’t look right in FF or Safari. Something weird with the first nav link on the left.

When I open it in Safari, it “freaks out” for a few seconds before settling.

The “bo” site is actually kind of nice, in my opinion. A little hard to follow, but then, I don;t speak French. Even so, it’s not that hard to follow. Loads pretty quickly.]

I would think “bo” would need a whole new concept to leave out Flash. And, “bd” can sure USE a whole new concept.

Just my opinions…

Bob


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I share your views Bob. I am especially surprised that bd has launched such an old looking site given her youth, is a designer and is married to an abstract painter. But then art&design is no longer one of France’s strong points. The other site is OK as you say but the owner only realised after the event that it is not likely to pass on relevant info, can’t be added to with ease and probably won’t be found. But since she paid a high fee for it she is unlikely to bin it right now.

But why does one remains up and running when java is off and the other does not? Any ideas?

Richard


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Well, maybe you can convince “bo” to make them an alternate html site. Some folks just can’t handle Flash sites.

Lots of companies make a Flash and No Flash sites.

Not sure why it plays while javascript is off. Don’t know enough about either.

Bob


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I haven’t looked at the code at either site, but there is a principle
called Progressive Enhancement that I know quite a bit about, and
champion where I can.

The idea is that you first build a site that delivers information to
anyone with a browser. (No script, no Flash, heck, no images even!)
Next, you layer on the goodies using techniques that provide those
goodies to the people who can use them.

You don’t alter the HTML pages of the site one whit – you use
JavaScript to add JavaScript support, for example, or Flash to enable
the Flash components. What you don’t do is start from Flash and then
add a warning that the customer must “upgrade” their browser. That
will merely get you the arched Spock eyebrow from every iPhone user in
the world. “As if!”, they snort derisively.

This takes a bit more planning and frankly a lot more technical
knowledge, than merely slapping an interface together in Flash,
placing it smack in the middle of an otherwise blank page in an
tag, and saying “site’s done!” cheerfully. But that
investment is paid back hundred-fold by the inclusion of otherwise
completely missing customers.

So, for example, how do you bootstrap JavaScript into a site? Well,
let’s say you have a form that you want to “Ajaxify” so the form page
never appears to reload. You start with a normal HTML page with a
normal form tag. You set it to post to a handler page, say call it
form_handler.php. You have integrated success and failure messages in
the form page itself, using inline PHP or similar. You don’t have to
do anything special to layer the Ajax function on to that base. Make
sure your form tag has an ID (Freeway won’t add this by default, but
that’s what Extended is for), and then add a listener function to the
head of the page:

<script type="text/javascript">
document.observe('dom:loaded',function(){
	$('yourFormId').observe('submit',function(evt){
		evt.stop();
		var f = this;
		this.request({
			onComplete: function(transport){
				$('messageArea').update(transport.responseText);
				f.select('input[type="submit"]').invoke('enable');
			},
			onSuccess: function(){
				f.getInputs().invoke('clear');
			},
			onCreate: function(){
				$('message').update('<img src="Resources/spinner.gif" />');
				f.select('input[type="submit"]').invoke('disable');
			}
		});
	});
});
</script>

And you’re done. Because this listener will simply not be fired in the
absence of JavaScript, nobody gets stuck. The Prototype request()
function takes a normal form tag, reads its method and action, and
constructs an Ajax call to the same handler that it’s set to use
normally. Your handler script will only need to check one extra thing
to decide if the request was sent through Ajax or not:

if(isset($_SERVER['HTTP_X_REQUESTED_WITH']) &&
	($_SERVER['HTTP_X_REQUESTED_WITH'] == 'XMLHttpRequest')){
	//only output the error or success message, not the entire page
	//then exit
}

And thus decide whether or not to return an entire page or just a
little bit of text with the form results.

And again, only the people who are prepared to enjoy this effect will
ever see it, and those who cannot (like Google, or visually
handicapped people) will never mark you down for trying and failing,
or worse, locking them out. This last part bears repeating,
particularly if you are working for any client in the public sector.
There are strict rules and penalties when it comes to discriminating
against people who are “differently abled” (to use the bloodless PC-
ism).

Walter

On Feb 25, 2010, at 8:55 AM, Robert B wrote:

Well, maybe you can convince “bo” to make them an alternate html
site. Some folks just can’t handle Flash sites.

Lots of companies make a Flash and No Flash sites.

Not sure why it plays while javascript is off. Don’t know enough
about either.

Bob


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

OK Thanks Walter for all that. Looks like I have some homework to do this week end!
Best wishes

Richard


offtopic mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options