7 replies [Last post]
gtbgmaniak
gtbgmaniak's picture
Offline
Regular
Mexico
Last seen: 9 years 37 weeks ago
Mexico
Timezone: GMT-5
Joined: 2009-01-13
Posts: 12
Points: 5

Hello there, what do you think of my company's website Tongue
http://www.nolmin.com

If you can try it in different screen resolutions Tongue

Debayan Gupta
Debayan Gupta's picture
Offline
Regular
Last seen: 8 years 46 weeks ago
Timezone: GMT-4
Joined: 2010-08-10
Posts: 45
Points: 51

Problem with width:100%

Just resize your browser window to any size smaller than the width of your header content - you'll find that the translucent background for the header (and footer) does not extend across the page - scroll right and see.

You'll want to use a min-width or something.

PS. This isn't really an _error_, per se, but more of a usability issue (should that have been an "an" ? Technically it should be "an usability..", but it felt wrong.. pooh)

The slideshow thing. It doesn't have any navigation on it - add some code so that users can move around + play/pause it (eg. if someone wants to take another look at something).

gary.turner
gary.turner's picture
Offline
Moderator
Dallas
Last seen: 10 weeks 4 days ago
Dallas
Timezone: GMT-6
Joined: 2004-06-25
Posts: 9776
Points: 3858

Needs work

I have three serious issues with the site:

  1. The never ending animation is annoying beyond belief. On my machine, a less than cutting edge model, the animation is jerky. This is especially obvious as the sequence goes from last to first images. I understand that lots of designers are enamored of movement for some reason; influenced by Flash and, the gods help us, gif sequences. Using javascript (and lots of people are also in love with jQuery) is the poorest choice for animations of this type.

  2. Look as I might, I found only the sub-menus in the footer had structured, semantic markup. Since, except for one bit in the header and another in the footer, the page is nothing but lists, why is it marked up with non-semantic, overly nested <div> elements? Re-code the page with semantically correct structural containers.

  3. Have you viewed the page with images disabled? There is nothing there. Your image replacement method breaks the page when images, but not css, are disabled. When both are disabled, the text shows, but then the page is only a series of links except for one small statement in the footer, a location that implies it's not all that important.

cheers,

gary

If your web page is as clever as you can make it, it's probably too clever for you to debug or maintain.

Tyssen
Tyssen's picture
Offline
Moderator
Brisbane
Last seen: 6 years 30 weeks ago
Brisbane
Timezone: GMT+10
Joined: 2004-05-01
Posts: 8201
Points: 1386

gary.turner wrote: Using

gary.turner wrote:

Using javascript (and lots of people are also in love with jQuery) is the poorest choice for animations of this type.

I'd be interested to hear what you think is the correct choice for this type of thing as it's quite a common feature on websites these days.

How to get help
Post a link. If you can't post a link, jsFiddle it.
My blog | My older articles | CSS Reference

gary.turner
gary.turner's picture
Offline
Moderator
Dallas
Last seen: 10 weeks 4 days ago
Dallas
Timezone: GMT-6
Joined: 2004-06-25
Posts: 9776
Points: 3858

As much as I hate to, I have

As much as I hate to, I have to give props to Flash for this type of animation.

cheers,

gary

If your web page is as clever as you can make it, it's probably too clever for you to debug or maintain.

Tyssen
Tyssen's picture
Offline
Moderator
Brisbane
Last seen: 6 years 30 weeks ago
Brisbane
Timezone: GMT+10
Joined: 2004-05-01
Posts: 8201
Points: 1386

But surely the likelihood of

But surely the likelihood of a Flash animation of this type being created correctly so that the content is accessible to non-visual readers is likely to be far less than if it's marked up in plain HTML with js providing the movement? I'd be inclined to think that you're more likely to be able to massage the js to ease the jerkiness (it could just be a case of using the jQuery Easing plugin) than you are to make a similar Flash file accessible to everyone.

How to get help
Post a link. If you can't post a link, jsFiddle it.
My blog | My older articles | CSS Reference

burlster
burlster's picture
Offline
Leader
Bournemouth
Last seen: 21 weeks 4 days ago
Bournemouth
Joined: 2007-05-31
Posts: 693
Points: 45

Hmmm...

Sorry to chip in, not my place really, but regarding Tyssen/Gary's conversation I'm afraid to confess I'm now also a lover of JQuery for page animations/slideshows etc... Particularly compared to Flash.

My only problem in this scenario is that it's practically the whole page cycling which after a short while actually seems to make me feel a little dizzy oddly. Perhaps Fade In/Fade Out would be better with such a large sized box?

Have YOU said Hello yet?
The CSSCreator Hello Thread

gary.turner
gary.turner's picture
Offline
Moderator
Dallas
Last seen: 10 weeks 4 days ago
Dallas
Timezone: GMT-6
Joined: 2004-06-25
Posts: 9776
Points: 3858

Good point Burlster. The

Good point Burlster. The fade-in/out would be less annoying, but not ideal.

As to accessibility, it's not accessible now. If images are disabled, the page is broken to the point of not being usable at all for anyone.

If tweaking the js will help the image transitions, fine. That does not remove the constant animation irritation factor, though.

cheers,

gary

If your web page is as clever as you can make it, it's probably too clever for you to debug or maintain.