First-pass review requested
Chris Beall
Decorative styling has, in general, not been applied yet.
Content is a mish-mash of text from the existing site or my imagination,
plus occasional statements of future intent.
I'm looking for a review of everything else.
Chris Beall
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Let's start with the fixed footer block. It takes up way too much of my
viewport that could be put to good use for content.
Footers belong at the bottom of the page, not permanently in-your-face
in the viewing window.
--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Windows
dorayme
Yes, don't have it fixed like that, it looks bad and is not practical on
pages where people would otherwise be able to read more before
scrolling. There is the added problem of your footer being rather tall
and having a fair few different sorts of things in it. The site map and
privacy policy link gets kind of lost.
How about using some of that space under the left column that is going
begging for some of the items in an effort to reduce the height of the
footer?
--
dorayme
Chris Beall
> Let's start with the fixed footer block. It takes up way too much of my
> viewport that could be put to good use for content.
>
> Footers belong at the bottom of the page, not permanently in-your-face
> in the viewing window.
>
Can you be more specific about "takes up way too much of my viewport"?
This was a specific request of the client. The intent is to ensure that
the footer information is always visible.
Chris
Chris Beall
> In article <hdvsrq$t34$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.non...@example.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Chris Beall wrote:
>>
>>> URL: http://ulsterliteracy.org/sandbox/
>>>
>>
>> Footers belong at the bottom of the page, not permanently in-your-face
>> in the viewing window.
>
> Yes, don't have it fixed like that, it looks bad and is not practical on
> pages where people would otherwise be able to read more before
> scrolling. There is the added problem of your footer being rather tall
> and having a fair few different sorts of things in it. The site map and
> privacy policy link gets kind of lost.
OK, so one reason for freeing the footer would be to reduce the amount
of vertical scrolling necessary to view the main content. Any others?
Except for the Site Map and Privacy Policy links, everything in the
footer is logically connected to the concept of soliciting money.
That's why the client wants it always visible. Although the icons in
the center are not links, they are intended to show the visitor what
good company they will be in if they, too, make a donation.
{The Donate link on the right will likely be changed to a PayPal Donate
button or the like, rather than just linking to the Donate section of
the site.)
>
> How about using some of that space under the left column that is going
> begging for some of the items in an effort to reduce the height of the
> footer?
>
The use of the left column below the navigation has not been nailed
down, but the client has indicated an interest in using it for a photo
and testimonial, which would vary from page to page. Anticipating that,
I've left that area unencumbered.
Thanks for your comments,
Chris Beall
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>> Chris Beall wrote:
>>> URL: http://ulsterliteracy.org/sandbox/
>
>> Let's start with the fixed footer block. It takes up way too much of
>> my viewport that could be put to good use for content.
>>
>> Footers belong at the bottom of the page, not permanently
>> in-your-face in the viewing window.
>
> Can you be more specific about "takes up way too much of my
> viewport"?
More specific? Okay... my viewport is 6.5 inches tall. Your footer
takes a full inch of that, reducing usable size to 5.5 inches. So say
somewhere over 15%, near 20% of usable space, depending on which
toolbars are in use.
> This was a specific request of the client. The intent is to ensure
> that the footer information is always visible.
Do they not realize that visitors are going to look at it once,
disregard most of it, then ignore it as they move between pages? (Or
curse at it...)
If I were you, I would convince them to realize this. Move your links
there (sponsors/donate/site map/privacy) to the menu on the left.
Oh, when clicking on site map/privacy, the footer content has an
annoying jump-about as it's loading the new page.
Just remove these from div.footer:
max-height: 9em ; /* Don't increase height of FIXED FOOTER
if width shrinks, which could
block
entire screen */
overflow: auto ; /* Scroll FIXED FOOTER if contents exceed
fixed height specified above */
position: fixed ;
The scrolling footer, I think, exacerbates the problem.
Chris Beall
>
> Let's start with the fixed footer block. It takes up way too much of my
> viewport that could be put to good use for content.
>
> Footers belong at the bottom of the page, not permanently in-your-face
> in the viewing window.
>
which didn't work if font-size was increased by the user).
Chris Beall
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>> Chris Beall wrote:
>>> URL: http://ulsterliteracy.org/sandbox/
>>
>> Let's start with the fixed footer block. It takes up way too much of
>> my viewport that could be put to good use for content.
>>
>> Footers belong at the bottom of the page, not permanently
>> in-your-face in the viewing window.
>>
> I have altered the footer max-height value to 50% (was expressed in
> em, which didn't work if font-size was increased by the user).
It is still about an inch high, but worse, now has a scrollbar.
Changing my font size either up or down doesn't make it go away.
Chris Beall
> Chris Beall wrote:
>
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> Chris Beall wrote:
>>>> URL: http://ulsterliteracy.org/sandbox/
>>> Let's start with the fixed footer block. It takes up way too much of
>>> my viewport that could be put to good use for content.
>>>
>>> Footers belong at the bottom of the page, not permanently
>>> in-your-face in the viewing window.
>> Can you be more specific about "takes up way too much of my
>> viewport"?
>
> More specific? Okay... my viewport is 6.5 inches tall. Your footer
> takes a full inch of that, reducing usable size to 5.5 inches. So say
> somewhere over 15%, near 20% of usable space, depending on which
> toolbars are in use.
Thank you. That's exactly what I needed.
>
>> This was a specific request of the client. The intent is to ensure
>> that the footer information is always visible.
>
> Do they not realize that visitors are going to look at it once,
> disregard most of it, then ignore it as they move between pages? (Or
> curse at it...)
I have tried to make them realize. I shall continue to do so.
>
> If I were you, I would convince them to realize this. Move your links
> there (sponsors/donate/site map/privacy) to the menu on the left.
I try to keep main navigation to <= 7 items (so I'm already 1 over). I
figure the Site Map and Privacy Policy links are of secondary importance
to the user, so they can be relocated to a page footer. IF the footer
were to scroll with the page, would you still prefer to see all those
links in the main navigation? (Um, that would be 12 selections, though
I think the Donate link is likely to become a separate button-styled
thing in any case.)
>
> Oh, when clicking on site map/privacy, the footer content has an
> annoying jump-about as it's loading the new page.
Yes, isn't that neat? (as in really stupid). You don't have to click on
it, just give it the focus (tabbing works). This places (on Firefox,
anyway) a 1px outline over the link. Although the CSS 2.1 spec says
this doesn't influence the size of the box, the browser feels obligated
to show it, so the footer gets a bit higher and a vertical scroll bar
appears. If you just click on the link, the effect lasts for only a
fraction of a second, but it makes the entire footer jump to the left.
I fixed this by adding 1px of bottom padding to the footer <div>. This
increases the footer height enough to make room for the eventual
outline.
>
> Just remove these from div.footer:
> max-height: 9em ; /* Don't increase height of FIXED FOOTER
> if width shrinks, which could
> block
> entire screen */
> overflow: auto ; /* Scroll FIXED FOOTER if contents exceed
> fixed height specified above */
> position: fixed ;
Yes. Note the capitalized FIXED FOOTER. That's so I can easily find
and delete all the stuff related to this if a decision is made to set it
free.
>
> The scrolling footer, I think, exacerbates the problem.
>
Thanks gain,
Chris
Chris Beall
> Chris Beall wrote:
>
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> Chris Beall wrote:
>>>> URL: http://ulsterliteracy.org/sandbox/
>> I have altered the footer max-height value to 50% (was expressed in
>> em, which didn't work if font-size was increased by the user).
>
> It is still about an inch high, but worse, now has a scrollbar.
>
> Changing my font size either up or down doesn't make it go away.
>
OK, I think this was related to tweaking to deal with outline on the
SiteMap link. I no longer get the vertical scroll bar on the footer
unless it has reached the 50% limit.
Should be OK now.
Chris Beall
dorayme
Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> dorayme wrote:
> > In article <hdvsrq$t34$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.non...@example.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Chris Beall wrote:
> >>
> >>> URL: http://ulsterliteracy.org/sandbox/
> >>>
> (snip)
> >>
> >> Footers belong at the bottom of the page, not permanently in-your-face
> >> in the viewing window.
> >
> > Yes, don't have it fixed like that, it looks bad and is not practical on
> > pages where people would otherwise be able to read more before
> > scrolling. There is the added problem of your footer being rather tall
> > and having a fair few different sorts of things in it. The site map and
> > privacy policy link gets kind of lost.
>
> OK, so one reason for freeing the footer would be to reduce the amount
> of vertical scrolling necessary to view the main content. Any others?
>
Yes. It takes time to realise the page has not ended and sometimes if
the last paragraph of content has ended and there is a bit of a space
after, there is the natural sense of the page ending... "Ah, the footer
... the end!". There is this latter subtler thing going on, people are
not so used to fixed footers. Not the end of the world, it is just not a
natural feel, one of those subtler things that can sum to make a
difference.
Partly btw, you might consider sticky footers if you decide to change,
it would at least get this big many featured "advertising" footer away
from distracting on big screens and short content pages.
> Except for the Site Map and Privacy Policy links, everything in the
> footer is logically connected to the concept of soliciting money.
> That's why the client wants it always visible.
>
If you discount the things that are not connected, of course, you will
be left with the things that are. <g>
> > How about using some of that space under the left column that is going
> > begging for some of the items in an effort to reduce the height of the
> > footer?
> >
> The use of the left column below the navigation has not been nailed
> down, but the client has indicated an interest in using it for a photo
> and testimonial, which would vary from page to page. Anticipating that,
> I've left that area unencumbered.
>
Consider other areas then. Often these ad things are put on the right,
but there are other alternatives. I am just suggesting to look about for
alternatives that will satisfy your client and yourself.
--
dorayme
Chris Beall
> In article <he19vt$807$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>> dorayme wrote:
>>> In article <hdvsrq$t34$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.non...@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Chris Beall wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> URL: http://ulsterliteracy.org/sandbox/
>>>>>
>> (snip)
>> OK, so one reason for freeing the footer would be to reduce the amount
>> of vertical scrolling necessary to view the main content. Any others?
>>
> Yes. It takes time to realise the page has not ended and sometimes if
> the last paragraph of content has ended and there is a bit of a space
> after, there is the natural sense of the page ending... "Ah, the footer
> ... the end!". There is this latter subtler thing going on, people are
> not so used to fixed footers. Not the end of the world, it is just not a
> natural feel, one of those subtler things that can sum to make a
> difference.
The false-bottom problem. Great! Another good reason to not do this.
>
> Partly btw, you might consider sticky footers if you decide to change,
I didn't understand "sticky footers". You seem to be talking about
something other than what is there today. What am I missing?
> it would at least get this big many featured "advertising" footer away
> from distracting on big screens and short content pages.
>
>
>> Except for the Site Map and Privacy Policy links, everything in the
>> footer is logically connected to the concept of soliciting money.
>> That's why the client wants it always visible.
>>
>
> If you discount the things that are not connected, of course, you will
> be left with the things that are. <g>
Irrefutable. But removing the Site Map and Privacy Policy links would
reduce the footer height by only 1em (actually .85em relative to the
user's preferred font size), which I don't thing would significantly
reduce the problem.
>
>>> How about using some of that space under the left column that is going
>>> begging for some of the items in an effort to reduce the height of the
>>> footer?
>>>
>> The use of the left column below the navigation has not been nailed
>> down, but the client has indicated an interest in using it for a photo
>> and testimonial, which would vary from page to page. Anticipating that,
>> I've left that area unencumbered.
>>
> Consider other areas then. Often these ad things are put on the right,
> but there are other alternatives. I am just suggesting to look about for
> alternatives that will satisfy your client and yourself.
>
I will contemplate this.
Many thanks for the comments.
Chris Beall
dorayme
Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> dorayme wrote:
> > In article <he19vt$807$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> >> OK, so one reason for freeing the footer would be to reduce the amount
> >> of vertical scrolling necessary to view the main content. Any others?
> >>
> > Yes. It takes time to realise the page has not ended and sometimes if
> > the last paragraph of content has ended and there is a bit of a space
> > after, there is the natural sense of the page ending... ...one of those subtler things that can sum to make a
> > difference.
>
> The false-bottom problem. Great! Another good reason to not do this.
> >
> > Partly btw, you might consider sticky footers if you decide to change,
>
> I didn't understand "sticky footers". You seem to be talking about
> something other than what is there today. What am I missing?
>
It is just a btw suggestion for what *else* you might do instead. A
footer does not need to follow the content immediately (though, mostly
this is the simplest and most reliable). There is a lot on sticky
footers. I saw this the other day:
<http://www.themaninblue.com/experiment/footerStickAlt/>
> > it would at least get this big many featured "advertising" footer away
> > from distracting on big screens and short content pages.
> >
> >
> >> Except for the Site Map and Privacy Policy links, everything in the
> >> footer is logically connected to the concept of soliciting money.
> >> That's why the client wants it always visible.
> >>
> >
I was rather thinking about removing everything *but* the sitemap and
privacy policy! You may also find not too far down the track that you
might want a copyright notice and maybe other simple links. I like to
build a bit of redundancy in pages and sometimes stick in a home link, a
contact link in the footer (even if it is done elsewhere) because some
people (like me often when I am bewildered by a site) will look at a
footer for such simple crucial things.
--
dorayme
Chris Beall
> In article <he19vt$807$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>> dorayme wrote:
>>> In article <hdvsrq$t34$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.non...@example.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Chris Beall wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> URL: http://ulsterliteracy.org/sandbox/
>>>>>
(snip)
I found another reason not to 'fix' the footer to the viewport. If you
habitually scroll using the Page Down key or by clicking within the
vertical-scrollbar 'elevator shaft' BELOW the 'elevator' (I'll bet these
things have other names...), you will scroll by the height of the
viewport. If you display the page and there is content hidden by the
fixed footer and you then scroll down using one of these methods, that
content will instantly scroll off the top of the display, never having
been seen.
So we have, a position: fixed footer:
1. Increases the number of times the user must scroll vertically to
see all of the content (assuming a drag of the 'elevator' or repeated
use of the down arrow key).
2. Confuses the user with regard to where the page ends. May cause
them not to realize that the page continues beyond the apparent footer.
3. Causes content to be skipped over if the user scrolls by 'page'.
I think we are rapidly approaching a case for the following guideline:
- Never use position: fixed on a header (top: 0) or footer (bottom: 0)
that has a width equal to (or even approaching) that of the viewport,
for the reasons listed above.
Are there other reasons? Any disagreement?
Oh, and any other comments about the site unrelated to the footer?
Chris Beall
dorayme
Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> Oh, and any other comments about the site unrelated to the footer?
I was not too keen on seeing the big 'Come to our holiday house' box on
every page and at the top. I realise it is a balancing act where to put
notices. But in the end, a little subtlety is best. Perhaps on the home
page a slightly more prominent position, but not on every page right at
the top and in people's faces. I expect yur site will develop and change
but this is what I noticed.
You know, there is an argument rumbling towards us that you need a third
column! To put the above notice at the top and to put your ads that are
presently in that huge footer.
--
dorayme
Chris Beall
> In article <he1oam$b6t$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>> Oh, and any other comments about the site unrelated to the footer?
>
> I was not too keen on seeing the big 'Come to our holiday house' box on
> every page and at the top. I realise it is a balancing act where to put
> notices. But in the end, a little subtlety is best. Perhaps on the home
> page a slightly more prominent position, but not on every page right at
> the top and in people's faces. I expect yur site will develop and change
> but this is what I noticed.
OK, and that's the sort of thing I need to hear: stuff that other people
notice. In this case part of the issue is that every page is the same,
which isn't the final intent. What the client has requested is that
this banner area will have different content on different pages, perhaps
3-4 'messages' total, except that the Home page area would be reserved
for current announcements (possibly also appearing on one other page).
So the Home page banner content would vary over time, but the banner
content on other pages would be unchanging. Probably general platitudes
about the value of literacy or the warm feeling you get from
contributing and the like.
(Incidentally, the intent is to make the home page banner area
changeable by the client, with minimal HTML skills, i.e. a single
paragraph of text, perhaps using spans for styling, if they want to
learn how to do that.)
>
> You know, there is an argument rumbling towards us that you need a third
> column! To put the above notice at the top and to put your ads that are
> presently in that huge footer.
>
I don't think I could stomach that. I'm a single-column person myself,
so I'm already out of my comfort zone. :-)
Thanks again.
Chris Beall
Chris Beall
> In article <he1n1d$2ch$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>> dorayme wrote:
>>> In article <he19vt$807$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>>>> OK, so one reason for freeing the footer would be to reduce the amount
>>>> of vertical scrolling necessary to view the main content. Any others?
>>>>
>>> Yes. It takes time to realise the page has not ended and sometimes if
>>> the last paragraph of content has ended and there is a bit of a space
>>> after, there is the natural sense of the page ending... ...one of those subtler things that can sum to make a
>>> difference.
>> The false-bottom problem. Great! Another good reason to not do this.
>>> Partly btw, you might consider sticky footers if you decide to change,
>> I didn't understand "sticky footers". You seem to be talking about
>> something other than what is there today. What am I missing?
>>
>
> It is just a btw suggestion for what *else* you might do instead. A
> footer does not need to follow the content immediately (though, mostly
> this is the simplest and most reliable). There is a lot on sticky
> footers. I saw this the other day:
>
> <http://www.themaninblue.com/experiment/footerStickAlt/>
OK, it's a specific technique, which I hadn't heard of before. Alas,
two problems:
- "The only drawback to footerStickAlt is that you must know the exact
height of your footer". The height of the footer varies with both
font-size and viewport width. Using ems adapts to the first variable,
but there's no way to adapt to the second. In the example shown, the
footer is fixed width, which I try to avoid.
- The client wants the footer visible at all times, regardless of the
amount of content on the page.
>
>
>>> it would at least get this big many featured "advertising" footer away
>>> from distracting on big screens and short content pages.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Except for the Site Map and Privacy Policy links, everything in the
>>>> footer is logically connected to the concept of soliciting money.
>>>> That's why the client wants it always visible.
>>>>
>
> I was rather thinking about removing everything *but* the sitemap and
> privacy policy! You may also find not too far down the track that you
> might want a copyright notice and maybe other simple links. I like to
> build a bit of redundancy in pages and sometimes stick in a home link, a
> contact link in the footer (even if it is done elsewhere) because some
> people (like me often when I am bewildered by a site) will look at a
> footer for such simple crucial things.
>
We started with all the nav links together on the side. I moved
Contact, Site Map, and Privacy to the footer to keep the main nav close
to that 7-item point (and thinking them of secondary interest to most
visitors). Contact got moved back. Replicating it in the footer would
be OK, but, unlike you, I like to AVOID redundant navigation. Just a
personal preference (probably derived from years of working with MS
products where there are 6 ways to do everything so you can never
remember where to find any of them amongst the clutter). My
understanding is that Copyright is unnecessary, at least in the US, and
I can't fathom why anyone would steal this content (or my site design)
anyway.
No matter where you move the solicitation stuff, the client will be
fixated on making it always visible, which implies position: fixed (or,
urk, frames). I think I need to persuade them that such strong-arm
techniques are likely to reduce donations rather than increase them, at
the same time annoying folks who actually came to the site for information.
Chris Beall
dorayme
Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> dorayme wrote:
> > In article <he1oam$b6t$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> >
...
> >
> > You know, there is an argument rumbling towards us that you need a third
> > column! To put the above notice at the top and to put your ads that are
> > presently in that huge footer.
> >
>
> I don't think I could stomach that. I'm a single-column person myself,
> so I'm already out of my comfort zone. :-)
Ah, this explains things a bit! Everything depends. Many sites are
happily one col, many more are more happily two. But you should not be
too uncomfortable about three for where there is a real use. In your
case I was happy to mention three because looking at your content it is
very squeezable, meaning you are less likely to run into horizontal
scrolling problems, float drops and so on...
If you want to stay comfortable, the all-singing, all-dancing 3-col
layouts that are not table based (table based is an absolute cinch and
solid as a rock for visual browsers) may best be steered clear of, the
holy grail ones... Begin with something simple instead like an
additional right floated div (<div class="features">) and try your
notice and your ads in it, you would need to style a bit differently.
Let the centre col be flexible, don't specify a width for it.
--
dorayme
dorayme
Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> - "The only drawback to footerStickAlt is that you must know the exact
> height of your footer". The height of the footer varies with both
> font-size and viewport width.
It was just a quick link to you to start you looking at it if you
fancied the idea, there is a fair literature on the matter.
> >>>> Except for the Site Map and Privacy Policy links, everything in the
> >>>> footer is logically connected to the concept of soliciting money.
> >>>> That's why the client wants it always visible.
> >>>>
> >
> > I was rather thinking about removing everything *but* the sitemap and
> > privacy policy! You may also find not too far down the track that you
> > might want a copyright notice and maybe other simple links. I like to
> > build a bit of redundancy in pages and sometimes stick in a home link, a
> > contact link in the footer (even if it is done elsewhere) because some
> > people (like me often when I am bewildered by a site) will look at a
> > footer for such simple crucial things.
> >
>
> We started with all the nav links together on the side. I moved
> Contact, Site Map, and Privacy to the footer to keep the main nav close
> to that 7-item point (and thinking them of secondary interest to most
> visitors). Contact got moved back. Replicating it in the footer would
> be OK, but, unlike you, I like to AVOID redundant navigation. Just a
> personal preference ..
well, fir enough, but I was not meaning to go overboard on it, but there
may well be some links you will find appropriate for the footer later
and you are getting pretty crowded in there, it is like your footer is
not really a footnote to anything but really quite a feature.
>
> No matter where you move the solicitation stuff, the client will be
> fixated on making it always visible, which implies position: fixed (or,
> urk, frames).
Not really. If it is at the top somewhere, to the side it will be
visible and no need to fix anything. But I know, you are not keen on a
third col and do not want to reserve the nav col for other things....
--
dorayme
Chris Beall
> In article <he1vj1$rs5$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>
>> - "The only drawback to footerStickAlt is that you must know the exact
>> height of your footer". The height of the footer varies with both
>> font-size and viewport width.
>
>
> It was just a quick link to you to start you looking at it if you
> fancied the idea, there is a fair literature on the matter.
>
OK, and it's good for me to be aware that such techniques are available.
In this case, however, I don't believe there will be any pages that
will be short enough to warrant this treatment.
>
>>>>>> Except for the Site Map and Privacy Policy links, everything in the
>>>>>> footer is logically connected to the concept of soliciting money.
>>>>>> That's why the client wants it always visible.
>>>>>>
>>> I was rather thinking about removing everything *but* the sitemap and
>>> privacy policy! You may also find not too far down the track that you
>>> might want a copyright notice and maybe other simple links. I like to
>>> build a bit of redundancy in pages and sometimes stick in a home link, a
>>> contact link in the footer (even if it is done elsewhere) because some
>>> people (like me often when I am bewildered by a site) will look at a
>>> footer for such simple crucial things.
>>>
>> We started with all the nav links together on the side. I moved
>> Contact, Site Map, and Privacy to the footer to keep the main nav close
>> to that 7-item point (and thinking them of secondary interest to most
>> visitors). Contact got moved back. Replicating it in the footer would
>> be OK, but, unlike you, I like to AVOID redundant navigation. Just a
>> personal preference ..
>
> well, fir enough, but I was not meaning to go overboard on it, but there
> may well be some links you will find appropriate for the footer later
> and you are getting pretty crowded in there, it is like your footer is
> not really a footnote to anything but really quite a feature.
Here's what I'm thinking of proposing:
1. Set the footer free, to scroll with the rest of the page.
2. Below the photo, put the funder logos now in the footer, perhaps
preceded by a 'Donate' button. I think there is room on most 'standard'
displays for all of this to show before scrolling. This reduces the
footer contents to secondary links and 'Support our sponsors'.
This sort of thing will get hashed out in a room full of people, several
of whom are from the print media world, so it will be a challenge
regardless of outcome.
>
>> No matter where you move the solicitation stuff, the client will be
>> fixated on making it always visible, which implies position: fixed (or,
>> urk, frames).
>
> Not really. If it is at the top somewhere, to the side it will be
> visible and no need to fix anything. But I know, you are not keen on a
> third col and do not want to reserve the nav col for other things....
>
My sense from the client is that 'visible when the page is first
displayed' was not the objective, but rather 'visible until the user
leaves the site or dies of frustration', i.e. cannot be scrolled off.
Perhaps they could just get a pad of Post-it(tm) notes with this data on
them and hand one to everyone who stops by, so they could stick it to a
corner of their display... :^)
Chris Beall
Chris Beall
Um, that's the way the footer is styled today, although the center is
given a 50% width.
Guess I misled you. Multi-column isn't outside my technical comfort
zone, it's outside my aesthetic comfort zone. I don't like clutter,
which includes a stunning percentage of sites today (though you wouldn't
guess that if you saw my desk...).
Thanks for taking all the time on this. Watch for another review in a
couple of weeks.
Chris Beall
dorayme
Chris Beall <Chris...@prodigy.net> wrote:
OK but I was meaning the content, not footer.
> Guess I misled you. Multi-column isn't outside my technical comfort
> zone, it's outside my aesthetic comfort zone.
Oh, sorry! I sympathise and try to stay clear of a third col myself
mostly. But pressures do build now and again...
--
dorayme
Jim Moe
>>
>> Let's start with the fixed footer block. It takes up way too much of my
>> viewport that could be put to good use for content.
>>
> which didn't work if font-size was increased by the user).
>
have it):
You have loads of unused whitespace on the left below the main menu, and
on the right next to the inspiring quote and main title. You could put the
graphic logos/links below the main menu, and float the Support and Donate
boxes on the right.
This puts the client's information in an immediately visible location,
uses otherwise empty space, and opens the footer to be more footer-ish
with neat footer-like content.
--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)
Chris Beall
Thanks, I'll add that to the list of options. I had a good chat with
the main decision-maker today and I think the fixed footer is on the way
out. Just have to do a demo. Also discussed alternative locations for
the current footer contents, but not the version you describe.
Chris Beall