lwsimon

This is a *good* thing for people who are good at what they do. When badly coded sites become the norm, correct, efficient sites will be set apart in the consumer's eye. Web developers may become a dime a dozen, but good web developers will be worth their weight in gold. Successful sites - those with the money to spend - will be looking for a way to differentiate themselves. With their only face to the customer being their website, a well-run site will be at a premium.

Korn, Limp Biskit, Eminem, D12, DMX, and Disturbed for me, but I understand

I listen to Sirius's Hip-Hop Nation when coding. Its odd, actually. I don't much like hiphop music, but the driving beats seem to help me think. Its just static in the background, anyhow.

You should probably start your own topic for a question that complex.

I've used statcounter.com for a long time, but will probably self-host AWStats in the future

You should read this post.

I was just wondering if the rotation of the symbol was a statement of some kind that I wasn't getting, is all. There's nothing at all wrong with it, I still understood what it meant. If it helps, I'm viewing the site in Chrome 1.0.154.36. I tested in Firefox 3.0.5, and it shows the same -- just a space between the right edge of the text and the scrollbar.

Yes, I see it that way as well. I'm pretty outspoken politically, and oppose any and all regulations requiring businesses to cater to people they don't want to. That said, it doesn't make sense to build an application in a manner that will cause issues for users, when creating it correctly is simply a matter of doing things the right way the first time. Also, I have HR's backing on this. I'm just looking for a way to diplomatically show the people building the software "this is why you should do it this way." I would rather change their minds than simply have someone tell them the way to do it right.

I think there are a couple of things that make it feel disjointed. First off, is the thick black header. It feels a bit out of place. Second it the scrollbars - that tells me "this is from somewhere else" - I may be the exception to this, though. Finally, there is about a 200px gap of the right side of your search area. I don't think its a bad choice, to be honest - I'm just partial to search engines that output into your template. They are more trouble to set up, but feel part of the site because they *are* part of the site. One more, offtopic question - why is the "male" symbol on your page rotated 45deg clcokwise? I've always wondered that

Not quite spoken like that, but essentially. I'm being viewed as a picky business partner, because I want them to build things correctly. I need to come back to them with an argument they understand. So far, the best I've found is a snippet from the ADA website:

I brought that up - their argument was "But that's dealing with customers. These are employees. They shouldn't be using the application"

I'm trying to move accessibility and usability into the forefront with our IT department, and have received quite a bit of pushback. Can anyone cite litigation that resulted in disabled users being unable to access company information?

I've run into this in the past, and will nearly flatly refuse to make such changes. If the customer insists that is what they want, then we have to go back to the contract. As they are asking me to deviate from what my business is known for, I will be unable to use their site as an example of my work. Using the site as an example is a form of compensation, so I must increase my rate significantly to compensate. In addition, I need to build in the time required to remove my tagline from the template footer. So, in short - I'd be happy to do that for you, but its going to cost you an additional $500. If I did not have the luxury of doing this (i.e., this was my sole source of income), I would make my recommendation, make it clear, in writing, that this decision was a design requirement by the site owner, and quietly remove my contact information.

I agree with falken --- the first is the better one, but it doesn't feel part of the site.

I would go with a hosted search solution. I've heard good things about Perlfect, which seems to be pretty commonly used these days, and in active development. I've used ht://dig in the past, and it works great. In fact, I'm using it now on a 30k page intranet. That said, it seems to be a dead project, so support would be an issue. I believe it also requires that you have command-line access and a root or sudo account, so you can add the indexer to cron. Alternatively, you could index manually when you change something.

I don't speak Spanish, so I can't review the content - but the site itself looks nice. Very clean, and professional. I like the layout. Code is clean, but it has a transitional doctype. The homepage only has 4 errors when validated as strict - I'd clean those up, and change the doctype. The logo image is a .jpg, when it should be a .gif - that will make it smaller (so it loads faster), and will make it sharper. It has a slight fuzziness to me, but I doubt most people would notice. Some of the images in the page body with rounded corners are slightly "jaggy" - I didn't go into detail, but I'm guessing they're either .gifs, or you're using a rounded corners script. I don't personally like those, but they are common. Finally, the contact info in the bottom left is... unorthodox. I've never seen anything like it, and didn't know what it was. In Chrome/Safari, it doesn't have a cursor effect, so I didn't know it was clickable at first. I'd ditch the graphic and go with some text instead. Overall, superb. Anyone who knows me here will tell you that I pick at things, probably to a fault. I would say your site is in the top 25% of sites that I've reviewed on here. Good job!

If you link them like this, you will also shut out any user who doesn't have Javacript. So - no mobile phone users, noone who has NoScript on Firefox, probably no users with severe visual impairment, etc. Are you prepared to lose up to 10% of your web traffic, depending on whose statistics you believe?

I am in the process of finishing up a site for a client, and she actually emailed me that site as an example of what she wanted. I talked her out of it, but the result isn't THAT much better.

"There once was a man who had a programming problem. He decided to solve it by using regular expressions. Now he has two problems."

o/

I loved w3schools, and they were my basis for learning Javascript - but I must reiterate that their tutorials are dated. Things like document.write() should never be used today. Bear in mind that they are teaching you the language, not how it should be used

I'm not totally sure how a digital camera relates to Evernote (I'm assuming you were referring to me )... you'll have to explain that one. Evernote integrates with Eye-Fi, which is a memory card that connects via wifi. I'll be able to take a photo anywhere in my house, and it will automagically populate into Evernote over my wifi connection. The camera will be dedicated to that use. Once I get a decent smartphone, I'll use that - I have other uses for the Eye-Fi, and my wife needs a carry-in-her-purse-and-who-cares-if-it-breaks camera. Win-win

I just ordered an Eye-Fi and a cheap digicam because of you! I hate you.

I use text files in a TrueCrypt volume. The volume is only 1MB right now, so I just have a script that syncs it to my personal webserver daily, so I can access it elsewhere. YMMV on that though, my raw text may be a bit of a nerdy solution. You might try something like MindMap. I'm looking at EverNote now, and its looking pretty dang cool, too

A firm grasp of HTML is essential before going off into Javascript. I would also recommend learning at least some PHP first, as well. Building a site is done in layers. First you generate the content, either by entering it manually, or having PHP build it dynamicly. Then you mark it up in HTML, so the browser knows how it is structured. Then you use CSS to tell the browser how it is supposed to look. Then you can use Javascript to make things look a bit nicer, or save the user some time. Javascript should never be the only way to accomplish something, as many users have it turned off, or are using a device that does not support it. Internet tutorials on Javascript are a mixed bag. Many of them are poorly written, teach you how to do things in a non-compliant way, and in some cases, outright lie. If you ever see a JS tutorial talking about "associative arrays", as if they exist, run away!