Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #12669 > unrolled thread

Criticism Please

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  Criticism Please Web Interface Tricks <webinterfacetricks@gmail.com> - 2012-03-13 17:36 -0700
    Re: Criticism Please David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2012-03-13 18:07 -0700
      Re: Criticism Please Web Interface Tricks <webinterfacetricks@gmail.com> - 2012-03-13 20:12 -0700
        Re: Criticism Please David Mark <dmark.cinsoft@gmail.com> - 2012-03-13 20:47 -0700
    Re: Criticism Please Jeff North <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> - 2012-03-14 18:23 +1100
      Re: Criticism Please Web Interface Tricks <webinterfacetricks@gmail.com> - 2012-03-14 05:20 -0700
    Re: Criticism Please Dr J R Stockton <reply1211@merlyn.demon.co.uk.not.invalid> - 2012-03-15 22:31 +0000

#12669 — Criticism Please

I don't know how useful this would be, but I'm trying to make a
javascript program for rapidly designing page layouts; the theory
being it would give people more time worrying about content instead.

I'm interested in anyone's criticism of the idea or the execution (or
both), if you have a minute to spare.

Current attempt here: http://pagefabricator.com/quick_layout

Thanks

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#12670

On Mar 13, 8:36 pm, Web Interface Tricks
<webinterfacetri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't know how useful this would be, but I'm trying to make a
> javascript program for rapidly designing page layouts; the theory
> being it would give people more time worrying about content instead.
>
> I'm interested in anyone's criticism of the idea or the execution (or
> both), if you have a minute to spare.

Briefly, why are the checkboxes to the right of their labels in a LTR
document? That always looks weird. And why is everything in pixel
units?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12679

On Wednesday, March 14, 2012 12:07:55 PM UTC+11, David Mark wrote:
> On Mar 13, 8:36 pm, Web Interface Tricks
> <webinterfacetri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't know how useful this would be, but I'm trying to make a
> > javascript program for rapidly designing page layouts; the theory
> > being it would give people more time worrying about content instead.
> >
> > I'm interested in anyone's criticism of the idea or the execution (or
> > both), if you have a minute to spare.
> 
> Briefly, why are the checkboxes to the right of their labels in a LTR
> document? 

I guess I'm used to seeing forms with descriptions on the left and inputs on the right, both on paper and on the web, but I accept those are usually text fields not checkboxes.

> That always looks weird. 

Ok I will test it the other way and see how it looks.

> And why is everything in pixel
> units?

Three main reasons. 
1 I'm used to using pixels and find them predictable and consistent.
2 I noticed most web-pages these days have a central column of about 900-1000 pixels, in the centre of the window, so that was the first setting I included.
3 Then I made everything else in pixels for consistency, and for reason 1.

But I'm open to suggestions. How do you prefer to think of sizes when formatting various page elements?

Thanks for your feedback.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12680

On Mar 13, 11:12 pm, Web Interface Tricks
<webinterfacetri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 14, 2012 12:07:55 PM UTC+11, David Mark wrote:
> > On Mar 13, 8:36 pm, Web Interface Tricks
> > <webinterfacetri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I don't know how useful this would be, but I'm trying to make a
> > > javascript program for rapidly designing page layouts; the theory
> > > being it would give people more time worrying about content instead.
>
> > > I'm interested in anyone's criticism of the idea or the execution (or
> > > both), if you have a minute to spare.
>
> > Briefly, why are the checkboxes to the right of their labels in a LTR
> > document?
>
> I guess I'm used to seeing forms with descriptions on the left and inputs on the right, both on paper and on the web, but I accept those are usually text fields not checkboxes.

Checkboxes and radio buttons should be the other way around.

>
> > That always looks weird.
>
> Ok I will test it the other way and see how it looks.
>
> > And why is everything in pixel
> > units?
>
> Three main reasons.
> 1 I'm used to using pixels and find them predictable and consistent.

But the Web is a fluid medium, not to mention that IE won't scale
fonts sized in pixels. Yes, it will zoom the whole page, but that
creates a horizontal scrollbar.  You'd be better off with em's in most
cases.  The exceptions would be fixed, jigsaw puzzle layouts involving
graphics that have to line up exactly or they appear broken (e.g. with
unsightly gaps between them, unexpectedly wrapped, etc.), which
generally only look right at certain resolutions and scale factors.
Regardless, this is OT here.  You should post your link in a CSS group
as well for further discussion along those lines.

> 2 I noticed most web-pages these days have a central column of about 900-1000 pixels, in the centre of the window, so that was the first setting I included.

That's because most Web developers are clueless about their medium.
It's always been that way as there are few barriers to enter this
industry and advertising agencies "design" a lot of sites (they seem
to think they are magazine ads with links).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12695

On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:36:00 -0700 (PDT), in comp.lang.javascript Web
Interface Tricks <webinterfacetricks@gmail.com>
<d046ff93-7e9b-4617-b2dd-1ebd2eb726c7@x5g2000pbl.googlegroups.com>
wrote:

>| I don't know how useful this would be, but I'm trying to make a
>| javascript program for rapidly designing page layouts; the theory
>| being it would give people more time worrying about content instead.
>| 
>| I'm interested in anyone's criticism of the idea or the execution (or
>| both), if you have a minute to spare.
>| 
>| Current attempt here: http://pagefabricator.com/quick_layout
>| 
>| Thanks

You might want to validate the generated pages - I got 286 errors and
279 warnings.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12699

On Mar 14, 6:23 pm, Jeff North <jnort...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:36:00 -0700 (PDT), in comp.lang.javascript Web
> Interface Tricks <webinterfacetri...@gmail.com>
> <d046ff93-7e9b-4617-b2dd-1ebd2eb72...@x5g2000pbl.googlegroups.com>
> wrote:
>
> >| I don't know how useful this would be, but I'm trying to make a
> >| javascript program for rapidly designing page layouts; the theory
> >| being it would give people more time worrying about content instead.
> >|
> >| I'm interested in anyone's criticism of the idea or the execution (or
> >| both), if you have a minute to spare.
> >|
> >| Current attempt here:http://pagefabricator.com/quick_layout
> >|
> >| Thanks
>
> You might want to validate the generated pages - I got 286 errors and
> 279 warnings.

Thanks for the tip. I tested it fairly thoroughly but didn't use a
validator. I will do so and make it compliant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12776

In comp.lang.javascript message <d046ff93-7e9b-4617-b2dd-1ebd2eb726c7@x5
g2000pbl.googlegroups.com>, Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:36:00, Web Interface
Tricks <webinterfacetricks@gmail.com> posted:

>I don't know how useful this would be, but I'm trying to make a
>javascript program for rapidly designing page layouts; the theory
>being it would give people more time worrying about content instead.
>
>I'm interested in anyone's criticism of the idea or the execution (or
>both), if you have a minute to spare.
>
>Current attempt here: http://pagefabricator.com/quick_layout

With current Opera release, that page, right click, validate, "286
Errors, 280 warning(s)".  Granted - those appear to be two types of
complaint, multiply on each of multiple similar lines.

It fails with Firefox Zoom Text Only wound up.

It overrules my choice of text, etc., font size and face.

Everything is sized in px.

It has "<script>" in it.

The string "etc" requires a full stop; and "comfortabler" is not an
English word (in addition, Webster does not know it).

The page does not link to its presumed Home Page
<http://pagefabricator.com/>.

With my preferred window width, or when Zoomed, that page hides most of
some buttons under another element

The author has a low-grade E-mail address, and gives no real name or
address.  One can have no confidence in her work, from the sample seen.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk  Turnpike 6.05  WinXP.
 Web  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQ-type topics, acronyms, and links.
 Command-prompt MiniTrue is useful for viewing/searching/altering files. Free,
 DOS/Win/UNIX now 2.0.6; see <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/pc-links.htm>.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web