Forums | MacLife

resedit · 2007-07-09 3:02 am

Below are the results of checking this document for XML well-formedness and validity.

1. Error Line 55 column 34: there is no attribute "target".

<a href="/gallery2/" target="_new" title="Gallery">Gallery</a>

You have used the attribute named above in your document, but the document type you are using does not support that attribute for this element.

Is there a css way to tell browsers to open the link in a new window?

resedit · 2007-07-09 5:29 am

Geez - this is an error I'm just going to ignore.

http://www.simplebits.com/notebook/2004/05/06/sq.html

http://www.accessify.com/features/tutor … w-windows/

I don't want to use transitional because I want to see errors from depricated uses.
I don't want to use javascript because it is too complex a solution.
I definitely don't want my own DTD for it to be "valid"
And yes - I really do want it to open in a new window. Users who don't like it can tell their browser not to, and if their browser doesn't let them, they can file a feature request.

I don't understand why they dropped it. I know they dropped frame support, but that attribute was not just for frames.

avkills · 2007-07-09 7:09 am

If you want res I can email you some JavaScript code that will open a new window centered on the screen, you specify the size when you call the code. Although you'll still have to come up with a solution for those paranoid types who turn JavaScript off. shrug The DTD method you linked to doesn't seem all that bad, although it all looked like greek. wink

-mark

registered_user · 2007-07-09 10:34 am

Here's the complex solution I use. It has the added benefit of not allowing Safari 2 users to try to open that bad boy in a tab. They can try command-clicking all the want, but a new window spawns each time. :goth: I think they fixed in the beta though.

<a href="/" onclick="window.open(this.href);">link</a>

Alien · 2007-07-09 10:49 am

resedit wrote:
And yes - I really do want it to open in a new window. Users who don't like it can tell their browser not to, and if their browser doesn't let them, they can file a feature request.

How about they file a feature request with you and demand back command over their god-damn interface?

Yes, I do feel strongly about crap like that. it was deprecated because the realm of the HTML page is the window, nothing outside of it. Stay in your sandbox. If your page is so damn interesting that people want to keep it open even when clicking to somewhere else, make sure it is so damn interesting that they will choose to do so.

,xtG
.tsooJ

resedit · 2007-07-09 2:03 pm

OK - here's the issue.
It's the website from which I will be selling my snakes.

It needs to open a separate window for the photo gallery (which is http://gallery.menalto.com/ - an awesome piece of web software) - once the user enters the photo gallery, the user will undoubtedly do several clicks as they browse what I have available etc. - so having it open in a new window allows them to easily use the gallery without needing to use the fricken back button 20 times to get back to the page on my site that they were looking at (such as the order instructions or the policy page etc.)

The realm of an HTML page is a window, but application they are using is a web browser, and a browser that does not allow them to view several windows for multiple realms is a browser that will ignore the target tag.

In Firefox - I can set a preference that forces links that open in a new window to open in a new tab or open in the same window ignoring the target tag:

Now I know that the firefox coders are a crack team of professionals - but that allows users who hate the action of a new window popping up to prevent it from happening, either by having it open in a new tab or by having it open in the same window. It shouldn't be too hard for other browser developers to implement that kind of feature if there really is a demand for it.

Form over Function sucks - and due to the nature of gallery quite likely resulting in numerous clicks, not having it open in a new window will result in frustration for many users who then want to get back to where they were before they browsed the photo gallery.

Last edited by resedit (2007-07-09 2:04 pm)

TonyPrevite · 2007-07-09 2:27 pm

Why not actually integrate Gallery into your website and provide "breadcrumbs" for users to go back to?

Oh and to answer your original question.

NO

CSS = presentation

Last edited by TonyPrevite (2007-07-09 2:29 pm)

resedit · 2007-07-09 3:17 pm

That would be really massive effort, and I don't want the site designed around gallery - I want gallery to showcase the animals by species and clutch. Besides - by keeping gallery separate, it is easily replaceable if I need to in the future with minimal effort.

Maxweb · 2007-07-09 6:31 pm

You can pursue this course: being adamant about having another page "pop" open on a mouse click etc. But be aware that you are swimming upstream against modern web practice and convention here. A lot of people hate having extra windows popping up on their displays. Its better to imbed ALL of your content and allow the user to make the decision on their own. Doing so makes your pages far more accessible as well. This is becoming more important as more users are using hand held devices like the iPhone etc. Tons of folks have figured out a way of displaying all their content without pop ups, java script and Flash. Good xhtml pages and CSS is all you really need...

Max

Last edited by Maxweb (2007-07-09 6:34 pm)

Scott · 2007-07-09 6:31 pm

resedit wrote:
which is http://gallery.menalto.com/ - an awesome piece of web software...

lol
Please tell me you are being sarcastic.

---

I concur with Alien. Both in reasoning, and strength of opinion.

Miles · 2007-07-09 7:16 pm

I don't understand why they dropped it. I know they dropped frame support, but that attribute was not just for frames.

Opening a new window is behavior, not semantics.

resedit wrote:
It needs to open a separate window for the photo gallery

No, it really doesn't. If it does, your website has serious usability issues.

once the user enters the photo gallery, the user will undoubtedly do several clicks as they browse what I have available etc. - so having it open in a new window allows them to easily use the gallery without needing to use the fricken back button 20 times to get back to the page on my site that they were looking at (such as the order instructions or the policy page etc.)

I would argue that that should be for me to decide. If I want to easily use a gallery without having to click back 20 times, then I'll command-click to open it in a new tab. The decision of when to "branch" your browsing history is a powerful one, and by forcing links to open in a new window (or tab) takes that away from me.

I do think that there are instances where it's appropriate for a webpage to open a new window—this just isn't one of them.

I'm normally not a fan of most "Web 2.0"-style frameworks, but if you can't fix the usability issues otherwise, I think using something like GreyBox to open the galleries in would be preferable to opening a new window.

avkills · 2007-07-09 7:27 pm

That greybox is pretty cool Miles. I may look into doing that with the company site also. Although it looks like it has a lot of stuff. I forget, but I found one similar the other day, but I am not sure if it was bigger or smaller in terms of kb.

-mark

Abu · 2007-07-09 8:05 pm

I used lightwindow on this site.

resedit · 2007-07-09 8:31 pm

Scott wrote:
resedit wrote:
which is http://gallery.menalto.com/ - an awesome piece of web software...

Please tell me you are being sarcastic.

What's wrong with it?
It works extremely well - and has a lot of functionallity that can be added via plugins.

resedit · 2007-07-09 8:40 pm

Miles wrote:
I don't understand why they dropped it. I know they dropped frame support, but that attribute was not just for frames.
Opening a new window is behavior, not semantics.

A behaviour the user can control via browser preference.
Mine is set to open such windows in a new tab - that's what I want.
What the browser does with a target tag when the target does not exist is completely up to the browser and how the user has chosen to configure it.

resedit wrote:
It needs to open a separate window for the photo gallery
No, it really doesn't. If it does, your website has serious usability issues.

Perhaps - but it works extremely well for what I want to accomplish.

once the user enters the photo gallery, the user will undoubtedly do several clicks as they browse what I have available etc. - so having it open in a new window allows them to easily use the gallery without needing to use the fricken back button 20 times to get back to the page on my site that they were looking at (such as the order instructions or the policy page etc.)
I would argue that that should be for me to decide. If I want to easily use a gallery without having to click back 20 times, then I'll command-click to open it in a new tab.

That assumes you know what the link you are clicking on is going to be like.

The decision of when to "branch" your browsing history is a powerful one, and by forcing links to open in a new window (or tab) takes that away from me.

Not if you use a browser that lets you control it - like I do. Does Safari have such a preference? If not it should - because the target tag is out there quite a bit.

I do think that there are instances where it's appropriate for a webpage to open a new window—this just isn't one of them.

I do. It makes things a lot easier.

I'm normally not a fan of most "Web 2.0"-style frameworks, but if you can't fix the usability issues otherwise, I think using something like GreyBox to open the galleries in would be preferable to opening a new window.

I'll look at that.

-=-
For what it is worth -

http://www.temptingevereptiles.com/

Don't laugh at the colors - I borrowed the style sheet from a previous project and haven't bothered updating it yet, as the site is still very much a work in progress. Fixing that stuff is last on my list.

resedit · 2007-07-09 8:55 pm

In my browser (Firefox) - greybox does the same thing - it opens the link in a new tab (as my preference is for new windows).

Thus - I don't see the advantage of using it.

resedit · 2007-07-09 8:57 pm

Oh - I see.
You have to allow JavaScript for it to work.
I run NoScript so it doesn't work unless I allow the site.

Looks kind of cool - I may give it a try.

TonyPrevite · 2007-07-09 9:06 pm

In looking at your site, it would be a piece of cake to build Gallery right into the design. Then your problem is solved without ugly new browser windows opening. And yes, that behavior is UGLY.

resedit · 2007-07-09 9:18 pm

Well - greybox is neat, but I think it is better to have the gallery in a different window.

I did discover I shouldn't sell adverting space to google - embedding google resulted in a rather NSFW advertisement because of my domain name ...

Maxweb · 2007-07-09 9:30 pm

You have had several intelligent sounding people take the time to explain that the effect you are after is a lemon, but you seem determined to do it anyway. That's fine - go for it. But I can't help notice that your site has major design issues. You really should look into adding proficient looking presentation. As you are also building this site as a marketing tool I would drop the references about you being a "cheap geek" as it might make some folks wonder about you. I would also redo the navigation: the first several list items are muddy.

I would get straight to the content: the snakes (I would also not have a new popup page to get there either...)

Just my $.02

Last edited by Maxweb (2007-07-09 9:32 pm)

resedit · 2007-07-09 9:52 pm

Maxweb wrote:
You have had several intelligent sounding people take the time to explain that the effect you are after is a lemon, but you seem determined to do it anyway. That's fine - go for it. But I can't help notice that your site has major design issues. You really should look into adding proficient looking presentation. As you are also building this site as a marketing tool I would drop the references about you being a "cheap geek" as it might make some folks wonder about you. I would also redo the navigation: the first several list items are muddy.

I would get straight to the content: the snakes (I would also not have a new popup page to get there either...)

Just my $.02

The "cheap geek" stuff was put in as filler until the content is done.
Of course I'm going to remove it - nobody wants to do business with someone who is "cheap" - I wanted to see how the page would look with content and an image the content is suppose to flow around. The site has not been announced, nothing is for sale. It is a work in progress. The cheap stuff was written before I had enough content to wrap around the image (which will be replaced with one taken in better light) and I needed filler.

What do you mean by "muddy"?

I have to have a policy page.
That is a must because I am a member of a "good seller" organization where I agree to abide by the consensus of the general community when disputes arise - having a clearly defined policy that is easy for the buyer to find is thus a must, so that when joe consumer complains "So and and so did not ship my snake but I sent him the money" - I can clearly point out that it was too hot or too cold to ship, and that it was disclosed in my policy that shipping would not happen under certain conditions (believe it or not - that's a common complaint, people want their pet so badly they aren't willing to wait for a heat wave to end)

I have to have an ordering page because I know people will not read the policy page where there is ordering information.

I have to have a shipping page because I know people will not read the policy page where there is shipping information.

As far as look goes w/ colors and fonts - I haven't even begun to play with those yet, nor have I added pictures on the genus specific pages, it is a work in progress - those things are final details, the site is not ready for critique - nor do I intend to spend the time required to make it a site worthy of recognition in the jedi archives.

Maxweb · 2007-07-10 12:33 am

I hear you on the points you raise. However I still think your navigation is clunky.

First off I would not develop a commercial site while "live" on its real location: take it down and post it on a ghost test URL. While you you are busy hashing out all these details and debating your navigation system search engine "bots" will discover your site AND these discussions, giving the general public an open view of your search for a web identity. This is not good. Its fine to offer a "window" of the site while its under development, just don't do it with the real URL.

Too many people get hung up on on what plugin to use and how to add all kinds of fancy script technology. During this process the content gets subjugated while searching for web "coolness."

Content is KING! What is it you want to say? If you are selling something then what are you selling? People who come to a site should get the total meaning of the site in a fraction of a second. When I look at your top navigation and start page I learn nothing. Make is simple! "Site Index" is a poor choice when "HOME" will do. You could condense all your navigation to HOME, PROFILE, ORDERING, LINKS and CONTACT.

The HOME page could have a targeted headline system and a paragraph or two. The headlines and paragraphs should serve TWO masters: the web reader and the search engines. This is the WHO-WHAT-WHERE-HOW of the site. Below this info I would have a cool looking but direct gallery of the snakes. This is the main content. Make it the focal point on the HOME page without sending folks to another page via javascript.

Once you have enticed visitors with killer pics of snakes then introduce them to the expert on these critters: yourself. This is where you need to make an important decision: do you talk in first person voice or third person voice? Too many people don't pay attention to this. Basically it comes down to this: are you more comfortable saying "I am an expert at raising and shipping XYZ species of snakes across the country" rather than saying "Tempting Eve Reptiles is THE online distributer of professionally raised snakes and reptiles..." Its best to pick one "voice" and stick with it.

You want viewers to zoom through your site with ease, without confusion, and leave with a sense that you are a professional. Always end with a cause for action: ordering your product! Successful sites of this nature feature direct navigation (less is more), great design, effective copy (text), good typography and an easy system for sales. Having great content will bring repeat visitors and lots of "check this site out" recommendations from readers.

A good site that brings in sales needs a good marketing message, clean & direct navigation, attention getting design and a great cause for action ("buy this stuff"). All of this has to work across all modern browsers and other devices. It should also be "accessible."

If all of this seems overwhelming to achieve in one package then you might want to consider hiring a professional for all or part of the project. You only have one shot at making a good first impression. Some small business people mistakingly want to know everything about building a great web presence: not always the smart move. Its kind of like the question: "do you want to learn how to knit or do you just want to buy a sweater?"

Be open to criticism and debate. There is much to be gained from opening the design process to other eyes. The real benefit is how you interpret the input...

Cheers,

Max

Last edited by Maxweb (2007-07-10 12:41 am)

resedit · 2007-07-10 1:48 am

I thank you for your input and will certainly try to follow it.
Hiring a pro is down the line.

I'm actually a couple of years from producing a decent quantity for sale. My clutches this year consist of basically $25 snakes - and only about a dozen for sale. The web site is already costing about what I'll make before I pay for food. The purpose of the website now is so that in two years when I'm producing more profitable snakes, it will be more established - and I'll have a couple years of being a "known" seller - which matters a LOT to people buying higher end snakes because of the number of con artists in this industry.

It's "live" because to get a BOI "Good Guy" certificate is has to be live, and I want the certificate showing my participation in the program when my snakes go on sale in August.

Also - there's already been a couple of PHP differences between my web host and my home Linux box that I've had to file tickets with my web host to get gallery to run smoothly (mis-configurations on their end, for example this issue - http://gallery.menalto.com/node/64379 ), so I need that part on the live server.

-=-

All I came here for was to find out about xhtml and the target tag, a question I answered myself.

I know the purists don't like it - but the fact is that web browsers (at least firefox) do give the user the ability to make such links work the way they want them to, so I see it as a non issue - users who don't want new windows / new tabs can configure their browser to do what they want - other users who don't mind have the benefit of being able to view the products while still being able to read the content and ordering instructions at the same time - without needing to hit back and then right click to make it do so. I find it a PITA when I have to do so - for example, many forums default to external links opening in a new page - which I think is really nice. I don't have to remember to right click to view the external link while still reading the content. It may break the "one window" model - but it makes it easier for me.

-=-
I am going to use that GreyBox thing - it will work well as links for the available clutches for a given species, allowing it to open to the gallery for the specific clutch on top of the web page.

resedit · 2007-07-10 1:52 am

but anyway - in the future I will probably hire a designer.
This year - two clutches of low value snakes. Doesn't make sense.
Next year - potentially 5 clutches, some mid value.
2009 - that's the year when I will get some really nice clutches, and several of them. Assuming all goes according to plan. That may be the year I pay for better design. Doesn't make sense to now because no doubt it will need major changes by then anyway.

Maxweb · 2007-07-10 10:58 am

Good deal!
It looks like you have some time which will be a good thing. You could look into learning about design. There are a ton of ways of skinning this cat as the saying goes. From what I have learned the best way in the end is to create the simplest and cleanest code possible. This ensures for good browser support, fast load times, great search engine performance and wide accessibility. You really don't need Flash, javasripts, frames, tables, cells etc. Modern Web Standards and CSS will do it for you. Take a few hours and see the wonderful experiments this guy does with pure CSS; http://www.cssplay.co.uk/index He creates all kinds of image galleries without any scripts, databases etc, the magic is all in the master CSS file. The brilliant thing about Web Standards design is the complete separation of content from the presentation. Once you get your head around this all the advantages become obvious. Check out www.cssmania.com for tons of cutting edge CSS design.

You sound like a Unix guy. That's cool. Creating the kind of design I mention can be done with basic text tools. Having a graphics program and experience helps. Try GIMP if buying Photoshop scares you.

Have fun...

Max

Forums | MacLife

#1 2007-07-09 3:02 am

How do I fix this validation error?

#2 2007-07-09 5:29 am

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#3 2007-07-09 7:09 am

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#4 2007-07-09 10:34 am

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#5 2007-07-09 10:49 am

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

resedit wrote:

#6 2007-07-09 2:03 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#7 2007-07-09 2:27 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#8 2007-07-09 3:17 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#9 2007-07-09 6:31 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#10 2007-07-09 6:31 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

resedit wrote:

#11 2007-07-09 7:16 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

resedit wrote:

#12 2007-07-09 7:27 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#13 2007-07-09 8:05 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#14 2007-07-09 8:31 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

Scott wrote:

resedit wrote:

#15 2007-07-09 8:40 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

Miles wrote:

resedit wrote:

#16 2007-07-09 8:55 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#17 2007-07-09 8:57 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#18 2007-07-09 9:06 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#19 2007-07-09 9:18 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#20 2007-07-09 9:30 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#21 2007-07-09 9:52 pm

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

Maxweb wrote:

#22 2007-07-10 12:33 am

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#23 2007-07-10 1:48 am

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#24 2007-07-10 1:52 am

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

#25 2007-07-10 10:58 am

Re: How do I fix this validation error?

Board footer