MacRankin

Hi Eric I'm only just now having a look at it. You know, I was thinking of putting that hover list that billyboy perfected for me to good use as my next move if the suckerfish thingy wasn't going to make it, but as things stand I am getting it centered, though there is quite a lot about it I don't understand. Anyway, why not take a look at that hover list. Maybe there's something in the code that you can re-use... http://www. macrankin.co.uk/ web_projects/smart_lists/bb_hoverlist.html (remove spaces) In the meantime, maybe I'll give your code a look over and see if I can improve (mutilate) it.

Funny how you are working on this right now, as I'm trying to center a 'Suckerfish'. If nothing comes of my efforts, I may be gunning for yours', as I've already got my eye on one or a handful your website demos. :cool:

Erm, personally I'd give framesets a miss, even though that's what I first used to create my first website with -- eons ago. Nice menu, btw, even though I can't see to read it. You'll find most of the resources for learning stuff at the home page of this website... http://www.killersites.com/ html... http://www.how-to-build-websites.com/lessonTwo.php css... http://www.csstutorial.net/ When you've learned to do the simple things you won't have to resort to things like restricting a user's browser window. Not very clever that. Really, it isn't. There are other resources of course. HTML dog springs to mind. I like the look of that site, and everything about it looks clean. But really, start with a little html (html 4 strict) and an understanding of what css can do for you, and you're laughing -- maybe?

Yeah, that's not a bad resource there, jlhaslip :cool: I must admit, that even though I'd much prefer to watch this stuff, you do benefit more from reading how to do this stuff properly from the very people who understand it. I was watching the first few video lessons, and while it was fascinating to see how easy it all looked, things about how the code is made up was being left out. The authors of 'Learning jQuery' really go out of there way to give you a good understanding of how that code is made up, and how best to use it. The same can't be said for those video tutorials, though they are immensely tantalizing. Btw, I just like to apologize for creating a new thread, as I had not seen Eric's original thread. Getting back to jQuery doing what it does... What I really like is this 'Dom traversal' thingy, the use of custom selectors, XPath selectors, chaining, and even making your jQuery look almost like css. This jQuery reminds me a lot of how I first started to think about css, and how easy (I thought then) it is to manipulate. Direct from memory (though, I must get back to the actual reading of it)... $ (document) .ready(function() { $ ('a[@href^=mailto:]') .addClass('mailto'); $ ('a[@href*=.pdf]') addClass(pdflink); $ ('a[@href$=mysite.com]') .addClass('mysite'); }); ...Live checking... Yep, I'd say that the code was spot on. Shows me that the old memory banks aren't quite so run down. That little snippet of code represents how you can manipulate XPath Selectors. It looks complicated, I know, and there are one or two things I'm not 100% sure about, but they're trivial in comparison to what's missing on those video tutorials. I'm not going to explain all of this, so here's a snippet of a snippet. XPath selectors allows you to target any part of an url's, or a link's path... ^ beginning of an url * end of an url $ anywhere in the middle I think what's fascinating about jQuery, is that you can have all of this diversity in your mark-up, code and whatever, and have everything look neat and tidy. Larry Ullman does mention, in his blog, about 'Unobtrusive Javascript'. But really, with this jQuery everything becomes unobtrusive, funnily because even though you can now create even more styles, those same styles won't be clogging up your mark-up. :cool:

Well, I've been googling around for a possible answer, and the only lead I've been following concerns how all Japanese browsers are set up to maybe read certain scripts, but can't find anything specific. Perhaps you can contact this client of yours', and ask him to contact his hosting provider asking them what might be the problem. Or maybe, seek out a Japanese-based tech forum and let them grapple with it. Not sure what else you can do, really?

jQuery. You know, I've never really understood all that gobble-de-gook that is javascript, even though I once wrote a tutorial. I mean, I was able to manipulate it, but only up to a point. It's hard trying to manipulate something when it's too blinking complicated, and you only need to use it very occasionally. Not only do I feel comfortable now reading through 'Learning jQuery', code and all, as if it were an easy read, but it almost looks as familiar as does css. I've only been reading the very early chapters, and already I'm excited about 'Chaining'. I've forgotten some of the other stuff, but I can still see most of that code dancing in front of my eyes. It's early days yet, I know, but if I stick with it, it might help me to spring-board on, so to speak, on other language platforms. I'm not 100% sure, but I believe Pakt, the publishers, allow for pdf downloads, so just in case you're in too much of a hurry now to be getting your hands of an actual book, you have, at least, options. :cool: Incidentally, there's a video tutorial of more than a few episodes, which I haven't been able to watch yet. But just in case you can't wait to see what it's all about, then you can catch all video lessons from Theme Forrest's blog... http://blog.themeforest.net/page/3/?s=jQuery Normally, I wouldn't stick with just one resource, but I really like this books approach, and may simply stick with it, until my mind really starts to get frazzled.

I'm not sure I can be of any help... The only thing that springs to mind is if your client has changed any passwords lately? If that's the case, then whoever administers that website will have to log in to their hosting service and seek help regarding this matter.

Actually, that should be Illustrator, the silent B-movies... I really wanted to create a tutorial on how to use the pen tool in Illustrator. I'm no expert meself, as using it can get quite frustrating, especially if you're trying to get something done that you pictured in your head. I'm still trying to wrap my head around creating a cyber city pop-up book. Silent B-Movies... http://www.macrankin.co.uk/cs3_tuts/illy/b-movies/b-movie4.html P.S. I'll try and get back with a fuller explanation, or some form of run down as to what is going on in those clips. P.P.S. You know, out all three Adobe applications, I'm still more comfortable using Illustrator, though Flash comes a close 2nd.

Hi everyone I've been working on a seamless background -- my first, which I'd like your professional web design opinion on. Now, I can already tell you guys that I'm not particularly fond of it. Maybe the colors are a tad bit too contrasty, or maybe it looks a bit stretched? It's taken me quite a while to finally have something done on this part of the project. I had hoped that my earlier attempt would have looked special. But those backgrounds also lacked something. Not sure what, as I still prefer them. But, anywho... Hopefully I will be building a website for a friend of another forum. I'm not a pro, so there is no time limit, as such. I'm just going to plod along like I always do. It's just going to take up some of my time, money, and no doubt will add a streak of white hair here and there, if I hadn't have pulled out all my hair by then. Seamless background... http://www.macrankin.co.uk/cybercity_books/new_grounds.html Advanced background trickery... (I can't even remember how I did this now?) http://www.macrankin.co.uk/cybercity_books/twinbacks3_01.html

Oh wow, I must have a real, err, fruity mind. I mean, while her butt wasn't swinging all that much (for my taste), an even wicked(er) thought had crossed my mind... How about instead of having an arrow highlighting a tool-tip, it, err, uncovers a certain area... Roll over, butt hover. Or maybe not.

I'm starting to do some very simple (silly) things with Flash CS3, probably things that are next to useless right now, but that will help me to do things (when I need to do them) more quickly. I don't understand any of that other gobble-de-gook regarding AcionScript, but if I can banish most of my graphics wants by using this program, then of course I'll be interested in wanting to understand some of that other stuff. Having said that, I'm pretty sure, though, that between now and then, I'll be wanting to learn more about jQuery, as that is a more natural and dynamic companion to CSS. The Pen tool is an absolute barsteward to get to grips with, but not so much if you don't need to get something done in a hurry. I, of course, used to work with Illustrator, and did eventually get round to using the Pen tool, but only after wanting to do more than just using shapes against other shapes, in order to manipulate them. You know, I get the feeling, as with CSS, that in-order to get to grips with something you've got to jump in at the deep end without even going through all the beginner's kind of stuff first, like the fundamentals. Saying that, though, I wish I could just pick up a good book on any given subject and learn from that, but that, unfortunately, isn't the way I like to learn. I like to surround myself with a bucket-load of resources, and slowly ease myself into that comfortability zone, so that I can let things seep into my mind. It took me less than 2 minutes to draw the whole image by pencil, but is still taking me all blinking day to work with the Pen tool. http:// www. macrankin.co.uk/ flash_aha/froggy_02/froggy_01.swf (remove spaces) ...Erm, when it's finished I'll try and put together some notes about the steps I took, possibly in the same manner as one of my ancient Illustrator tutorials of yore... http:// www. macrankin.co.uk/ illustrator_8.html (remove spaces)

:lol: ...Erm, I must update my site one day.

Excellent video, Ben. :cool: I recently read the printed version of this, albeit something akin to a written version on A List Apart. It was published (I think?) back in 2007, and quite a bit was said in that video that harmonized with that article, and ever since reading it, which was a couple of days ago, I've been wanting to understand what web design really should be about. The original article talked about how not to design websites as if they were mere posters, but that they should be constructed in a way of having a recognizable user interaction in a way that an architect creates say, user-friendly function to any given room in a building. Perhaps he is not a big fan of photoshop produced websites? Anyway, whether he is or isn't, I do now understand what is needed, though I wish I had your skills in all things graphics. There were two other points that he made that raised my interest... I've always had this passing interest in education, mostly because I need it, but really because anything I learn tends to go in one eye and come out of the other. Seriously though, there is a need for educators out there to get with all the current trends, as I have felt for a while now, as JZ mentioned, that there is no real program out there that can provide a real web design program that doesn't just take in the learning of one software program or another. I recently read an article on Sitepoint -- something about a freelance's design secrets. After I had read it I thought to myself, yeah, I guess that was interesting, but what design secrets, or even, what freelance design secrets were imparted to me? Jeffrey Zeldman talked not just about how to communicate to a client, but how to passionately engage a client in the ebb and flow of a project's progress, keeping it, up to a point, new and fresh in the client's mind. :cool:

Yeah, I thought that'd go down well. What I mean to say is, only allow access to the browser's view source command in situations when only legitimate viewing and testing are required -- if it can be done, that is? Okay, okay, I know that this suggestion probably sounds like sacrilege to you (and me, for that matter), but what has anyone or international body being doing all this while to get something done about it? I have read of other agencies' work being ripped-off and claimed to be their own work. It's scandalous!

I've come across that link before, but gave it a miss. I'm wishing I didn't now. Don't know the guy's name, but I was so focused when watching one of his CS3 Flash tutorials that it all became very clear to me, that is, the bits that washed over me when viewing another video tutorial. Amazing! You know, I was once very comfortable with Illustrator (8, that is), but because I left an humongous gap between the upgrading (to CS3), I kind of let this comfort slip away, and even though I was only very recently getting to grips with the Pen tool, mostly to create the batman signal, it may yet be that I'll make more of what I've done before, but this time with Flash. ...Bouncy ball time... http:// www. macrankin.co.uk/ flash_aha/aha_01/b_ball_01a.swf

Sorry to read what happened to you there Eric. I've been reading that if the look of the website is similar, but the code isn't, then any case against someone who does this is going to be weakened. Let's face it, there's a lot of scumbags out there who aren't interested in gleaning inspiration for their own betterment. You know, maybe hiding the code isn't the way to go about it. Maybe if this thing gets out of hand (as I believe it's becoming), perhaps then, all access should be denied to most who may wish to enable the 'view source' command, except of course, in forums like these.

There's a very good article that I'm still currently reading... www.sitepoint.com/article/ecommerce-seven-carts-reviewed/ I'm mildly interested myself, mostly because this, I believe, is where the real bucks are made. It would be nice if I could manage to do this myself, but there are other more important gaps in my knowledge that need filling. ...So far, I'm most impressed with http:// www. mals-e.com/ (remove spaces). This service is free, and really only for non heavy weight users, though they can cater for other requirements. I've been reading about PayPal, and the process of taking a visitor from your site, via a payment button, and then being presented with a somewhat confusing payment page. Not sure what the big deal is with Google's Checkout system, and not making their contact support page more visible? Anyway, Mal's, the first one allows you to place your own logo on their payment processing page. After this, it can get a bit risky, especially if you've got to be responsible for security. Still looks interesting though.

I have been searching for a website that compares rip offs, but I can't seem to find it. Anyway, I have also found a helpful website with regards to these matters... http:// www. invision-graphics.com/ design_ripoffs.html Ben, I've often wondered why instead of using copyright to protect work, why can't there be a online tool out there governed by some international body that will easily allow you to make public all updates of your websites from day one, and for there to be a real sense of justice administered when someone has crossed that line. Of course, I wouldn't like people to be dissuaded from gleaning inspiration from one's website, but still this internet has been around a while now, and these issues need to be seriously addressed. If something is not done about this then, perhaps there will soon be people trying to hide their code and files from everyone. Personally though, I like JBall's solution... Just reach in through my monitor and set their desk on fire.

Yes, he is really top-notch stuff. Trouble is, I don't understand half this stuff about layout workarounds that I'd like, and quite often I feel really dumb about it. Anyway, I've gone and posted something new over there which is guaranteed to give us both a new headache, as I'm not really sure I've carried out his instructions. Maybe I just need a bit more sleep, and have another go at this next Thursday, maybe, when I'll have a day off to myself? Oh well, here is the latest effort, which has had the structure of its CSS code altered slightly by Paul, and tidied up -- for I guess most pros to easily and quickly get to grips with. Though I much prefer it to (physically?) follow the html mark-up... http:// www. macrankin .co.uk/ layouts/pobs_stuff/ pmob_fs_01.html (please remove spaces)

Hi there Eric Sorry for seemingly disappearing for a while, but I've been on a different duty at work, and it has totally left me cream-crackered. I did have a sneak-peek over at Sitepoint, and Paul looks to have sorted that expression out nicely, though he also expects me to do a couple of other things to the layout to bring it 'up to scratch'. But, like yesterday, as now, I have absolutely no energy to do anything. Erm, maybe once I've clearly understood what Paul expects of, and I get his thumbs up, I'll try to report back here.

Well, you know, I thought I got real lucky with that first expression, as the whole experience of waiving that browser's viewport around was very smooth, but as soon as I implemented Paul's expression script, the whole thing became rather jumpy. Maybe that's why it seems more flexible. It shouldn't really be though, as I rather curtailed its max-width to 1152px, I think? Anyway, about that fix... You're doing it again. C'mon man, what is it? :cool:

You certainly did get my heart going, you wicked devil, you. But to be fair to you, I should have mentioned more precisely those min / max-width dimensions. Min-width: 800px / Max-width: 1280. I actually tried out your viewing experience, and noticed that there isn't an awful lot of flexibility when squishing the viewport from right to left. The reason I'm using min / max-width(s) is that as much as I'd like to see my own website displayed on an eighty foot monitor, somehow it just seems like too much of an extreme for my liking.

Thanks Eric :cool: ...But, erm, although your question is blindingly clear, it doesn't make much sense, as of now, no browser that this layout has been tested on should be fixed. The only fixed bit is with IE6's height. Unless those final suggestions made by Paul over at Sitepoint has drastically altered something in some way, I have no idea what might be causing you to be seeing this? Which one of these following layouts was you referring too? 2nd attempt http:// www. macrankin .co.uk/ layouts/ full_stretch .html (remove spaces) 3rd attempt http:// www. macrankin .co.uk/ layouts/ full_stretch_02 .html (remove spaces)

Hopefully, you're all not completely fed up with all my layout efforts. I'm just looking for that one newspaper style of layout that will help me feel more confident about doing 3-Column, fluid layouts. Erm, anyway, Paul hasn't commented yet on the latest layout, which includes his advised ways in which to get around bugs and compatibility issues regarding the min / max-width, expression script. To be honest, I'm not all that keen on the compatible expression version, as it is making my IE6 viewport 'jumpy', when waving it around... as you do, when testing the stability of a layout. Anyway, here is (please, God. ) the final version... http:// www. macrankin .co.uk/l ayouts/ full_stretch_02 .html (remove spaces)

Hm, to be honest, I've never like fixed side columns with flexible middle columns. I mean, it's ok and everything, but I wouldn't be happy with just the middle column doing that. Hey, but you guys are great. I mean, Eric really knows his stuff, and there's a few others round here that do too. Reading this stuff just takes me longer to do what I want to do now. Besides, even if I do read all your websites, which I have on occasion, it all disappears from my memory all too quickly, so I'm kind of having to re-learn what I've already done. Btw, Paul has given it the once over, and has recommended that I use another expression script, though I had no idea that this active X that you speak of has to be enabled. I have heard bad things about active X, though I can't remember what they were? Anyway, here is that script... #page_wrapper { width:expression( (d = document.compatMode == "CSS1Compat" ? document.documentElement : document.body) && (d.clientWidth > 1152 ? "1152px" : d.clientWidth Paul reckons that this one is better that the one that I'm currently using. Something about it being more compatible with IE5. I'm also at this moment trying to implement some of these things, as well as putting the absolute-positioned divs further down the page. I think he said that by doing it that way you avoid some IE bugs. So that's what I'm doing, apart, that is from typing this comment out. Wickham, thanks for having a look. Erm, I'll definitely look into that pure css way of creating min / max-widths. Maybe there is more people solving these problems, as there does seem to be an awful lot of ways to get round IE6 just lately.