Financial Aid Site
John W. Cunningham
The Financial Aid website is up and running, all table bugs worked
out, and I even put up some cool JavaScript slideshows. Any feedback
would be appreciated. But, before the complaints start rolling in,
here's some I anticipate:
1) In older versions of Netscape the text coloring on the main page is
strange.
Solution: Upgrade your browser. The text colors are changed by table,
and Grey is the default for the page. I am working on fixing this to
be compliant with old browsers without looking different in newer
ones.
2) In older versions of IE the drop down menu gets some funky vertical
lines before the menu items.
Solution: Upgrade your browser. This is a side effect of the
JavaScript menus. It is unfortunate, but this is the only way to do
the menu and keep it local, and working with frames. I like do design
locally, so the page is easier to deal with.
Overall, the page is JavaScript heavy, and works best with Netscape 4.
I'm sorry if this causes problems for you, but the page was built to
appeal to the majority, which is Netscape and IE (most of the page
works fine in IE, the slideshows are Netscape only, a non-Netscape
(labeled Low Bandwidth) version is availiable).
Feedback would be appreciated. Please keep the flaming to a minimum.
John W. Cunningham
Webmaster, Financial Aid
webm...@famail.tamu.edu
http://faid.tamu.edu
Dave Martin
In article <350aa08e...@news.tamu.edu>, webm...@famail.tamu.edu
(John W. Cunningham) wrote:
} 1) In older versions of Netscape...
} Solution: Upgrade your browser.
}[...]
} 2) In older versions of IE...
} Solution: Upgrade your browser.
}[...]
} I'm sorry if this causes problems for you, but the page was built to
} appeal to the majority, which is Netscape and IE
The main comment that I would make is this: what do the majority of
students that receive, need, qualify for, etc. financial aid use, at least
of those that HAVE a computer? These are people that need monetary help to
attend college, and you design the web site to require the most recent
browsers--which in turn require fairly recent hardware for reasonable
functionality. Are they supposed to spend their aid money on upgrading
their computers?
Not a flame, per se, but a strong request/suggestion that you seriously
look at who the pages are intended for. Don't use the "latest versions of
Netscape and IE are the major browsers on the internet" line. The majority
of people on the 'net ARE NOT going to be visiting the TAMU Financial Aid
web site. Write the pages for the target audience, not simply for your own
amusement or preferences. Yes, there are some neat things that you can do
with the most advanced web tools and plugins and Java applets and
JavaScript. But I doubt that many of your visitors--the ones that need the
*information* on the pages--will actually care about that.
--
* Dave Martin * macdave(a)tamu.edu or dbm(a)aol.com * Texas A&M *
John BigDog Cunningham
On Sat, 14 Mar 1998 15:24:52 -0600, mac...@tamu.edu (Dave Martin) wro
>
>The main comment that I would make is this: what do the majority of
>students that receive, need, qualify for, etc. financial aid use, at least
>of those that HAVE a computer? These are people that need monetary help to
>attend college, and you design the web site to require the most recent
>browsers--which in turn require fairly recent hardware for reasonable
>functionality. Are they supposed to spend their aid money on upgrading
>their computers?
>
>Not a flame, per se, but a strong request/suggestion that you seriously
>look at who the pages are intended for. Don't use the "latest versions of
>Netscape and IE are the major browsers on the internet" line. The majority
>of people on the 'net ARE NOT going to be visiting the TAMU Financial Aid
>web site. Write the pages for the target audience, not simply for your own
>amusement or preferences. Yes, there are some neat things that you can do
>with the most advanced web tools and plugins and Java applets and
>JavaScript. But I doubt that many of your visitors--the ones that need the
>*information* on the pages--will actually care about that.
To be perfectly honest, as far as my testing goes, the only thing that
does not work on older browsers (Netscape and IE 3) is the JavaScript
Slideshows. They both have alternates (as described in main header).
I enjoyed doing something really neat, that may involve a new browser
limitation. It looks good on my resume.
Admittedly, when I wrote the page I used Netscape 4 to develop it, but
checked back with IE and old Netscape to make sure the page worked.
Because of the browser difference, I never noticed a problem with the
colors on the main page. It's a small problem, but needs to be fixed.
Most of our patrons are either people who are already on campus,
therefore they have access to decent computers (able to run Netscape 3
or higher) or they are Financial Aid officers from other Universities.
They like to see a nice presentation.
Did you look at the page? I would like some actual suggestions (this
isn't an insult, just a request).
-John
__________________________
John "BigDog" Cunningham
big...@slamdesigns.com
http://www.slamdesigns.com
Jeffrey W. Baker
>Most of our patrons are either people who are already on campus,
>therefore they have access to decent computers (able to run Netscape 3
>or higher) or they are Financial Aid officers from other Universities.
>They like to see a nice presentation.
Really? I would think that most of the patrons are applicants who are
still in high school. I haven't touched financial aid since I was
admitted.
Some suggestions: the cost of attendance page has a nasty habit of
opening other other windows. I hate that. Also, the frames are
generally inconsisten: the left frame disappears regularly.
BTW, page loads quickly over modems.
Jeffrey
John BigDog Cunningham
On Sun, 15 Mar 1998 17:24:57 GMT, j...@tamu.edu (Jeffrey W. Baker)
wrote:
>Some suggestions: the cost of attendance page has a nasty habit of
>opening other other windows. I hate that. Also, the frames are
>generally inconsisten: the left frame disappears regularly.
>
The cost of attendance page, unfortunatly, is out of my hands.
Financial Aid used to have their own C.O.A. page, as did many other
departments. The problem is that they were all different. The Web
Gestapo came down and declared that there should be only one cost of
attendance page, which is handled by the Financial Department. They
have set up their pages as frames, and their main frame is named
differently from mine. I've been trying to work out how to keep new
windows from opening, but I have to link to individual parts of the
page, and that means I have to comprehend them. That takes time, but
I assure you, it's in the works.
Dave Martin
In article <350b7e8a...@news.tamu.edu>, flowm...@tamu.SPAMSUX.edu
(John } To be perfectly honest, as far as my testing goes, the only thing
that
} does not work on older browsers (Netscape and IE 3) is the JavaScript
} Slideshows. They both have alternates (as described in main header).
Except, of course, that you cannot get to the "low bandwidth" pages without
JavaScript (unless you simply view the source, which most don't know they
could do), since you use it to handle what *should* be a standard href
link. I don't see *anything* about the slideshow that couldn't be done with
more standard HTML (like the "low bandwidth", having Next/Prev buttons).
Netscape 2.x on up can use the META tag for auto-advancing to the next
"slide", even. No JavaScript needed at all.
Nor can you use the pop-up "Go" menu without JavaScript, and there aren't
standard links on the main page to get to those areas. I would recommend
replacing the JavaScript with a simple server-side form-processor CGI for
navigation, if not also adding a simple list of links (text or graphical
buttons) along the left side of the page.
} I enjoyed doing something really neat, that may involve a new browser
} limitation. It looks good on my resume.
Of course. I forgot. Student access to information takes a back seat to
what looks good on the resumes of the university staff members. True--those
slide shows don't seem to be anything of use to students (but do *they*
know that?). I'm just vocalizing my concerns that too many people do neat
things for their own enjoyment, rather than considering how it might affect
those that NEED the information.
I have no problem with having a jazzed-up version for those that WANT the
nifty stuff, but it should take a back seat to providing a basic version
that is more accessible to everyone. Heck, once the info is there in
simple, Java and JavaScript-less form, add a JavaScript to check browser
info and automatically redirect those with JavaScript support turned on to
the enhanced pages.
} Most of our patrons are either people who are already on campus,
} therefore they have access to decent computers (able to run Netscape 3
} or higher) or they are Financial Aid officers from other Universities.
} They like to see a nice presentation.
Just because they are students at the university does not mean that they
*use* the OpenAccess lab computers, nor *should* they need to. If they have
an older computer at home, or in their dorm room, and prefer to do things
from there, rather than from a crowded, noisy lab room, they should be able
to, and still access the information they need.
As for FA officers from other universities--perhaps they should be given a
different starting page than that for the students. I'm not quite sure why
other universities need to see A&M presentations--I'm sure there is a
reason, I'm not questioning that--but that can and should be separated from
the actual Financial Aid information that students will be looking for.
Have the default main page for students, and create a second page--with
links to the same info the students see, if necessary--for other FA
agencies.
} Did you look at the page? I would like some actual suggestions (this
} isn't an insult, just a request).
Yes, I did. But mostly I was responding to your own comments about the need
to use the latest browsers, and compatibility problems. The pages do *look*
good; I especially like the coin background (though maybe a bill here and
there might give a more "generous" appearance to the Financial Aid
department ;-).
I've been a staff member with A&M for nearly 11 years now, though only a
little over two of those working in an academic department. But I try to
remind myself that we are here primarily to support the educational
process, by providing assistance to the faculty and to the students. If my
criticism seems a bit excessive, consider it from the above angle.
And it isn't necessary to use JavaScript on pages intended for public use
in order to learn it or indicate your familiarity with it on a resume...
John BigDog Cunningham
On Sun, 15 Mar 1998 22:15:31 -0600, mac...@tamu.edu (Dave Martin)
wrote:
>
>Except, of course, that you cannot get to the "low bandwidth" pages without
>JavaScript (unless you simply view the source, which most don't know they
>could do), since you use it to handle what *should* be a standard href
>link. I don't see *anything* about the slideshow that couldn't be done with
>more standard HTML (like the "low bandwidth", having Next/Prev buttons).
>Netscape 2.x on up can use the META tag for auto-advancing to the next
>"slide", even. No JavaScript needed at all.
>
I didn't take time to work out the slideshows for old browers, I
simply exported them from powerpoint and put them in a window to match
the others. I was on a deadline, and had spent the entire night
before fixing the JavaScript so it would work properly. I am planning
to go back and fix the old versions, not to worry. I am also working
on and Intranet for the department, and I only work 11 hours a week,
so time is a problem
>
>} I enjoyed doing something really neat, that may involve a new browser
>} limitation. It looks good on my resume.
>
>Of course. I forgot. Student access to information takes a back seat to
>what looks good on the resumes of the university staff members. True--those
>slide shows don't seem to be anything of use to students (but do *they*
>know that?). I'm just vocalizing my concerns that too many people do neat
>things for their own enjoyment, rather than considering how it might affect
>those that NEED the information.
>
>I have no problem with having a jazzed-up version for those that WANT the
>nifty stuff, but it should take a back seat to providing a basic version
>that is more accessible to everyone. Heck, once the info is there in
>simple, Java and JavaScript-less form, add a JavaScript to check browser
>info and automatically redirect those with JavaScript support turned on to
>the enhanced pages.
I must admit that I have added on things that were too "snazzy" for
resume purposes. This is because when I graduate in 2 years I need a
good web resume to get a job doing web development for some serious
money. The reason I took this job was for the expierence and resume
credit, not for the money or the feeling that I needed to do something
good for the community. The only JavaScript part that's neccesary to
view the page is the menu, which is the same one used by the new
tamu.edu page. JavaScript is the best way to do this with frames,
which were an integral part of design process of this web. It is
compatible with Netscape and IE v3
>
>As for FA officers from other universities--perhaps they should be given a
>different starting page than that for the students. I'm not quite sure why
>other universities need to see A&M presentations--I'm sure there is a
>reason, I'm not questioning that--but that can and should be separated from
>the actual Financial Aid information that students will be looking for.
>Have the default main page for students, and create a second page--with
>links to the same info the students see, if necessary--for other FA
>agencies.
Our FA officers (mainly my boss) work with FA officers in other
Universities to invest the money they are given wisely in order to
keep your fees down. This page is a place for other FA departments to
see what we have to offer, in addition to it's services to current and
prospective students. Maybe an additional "FA proffesional" page is
neccesary, but like I said, time is an issue.
>
>} Did you look at the page? I would like some actual suggestions (this
>} isn't an insult, just a request).
>
>Yes, I did. But mostly I was responding to your own comments about the need
>to use the latest browsers, and compatibility problems. The pages do *look*
>good; I especially like the coin background (though maybe a bill here and
>there might give a more "generous" appearance to the Financial Aid
>department ;-).
I tried to keep graphics small, the background being one of them, in
order to keep download time to a minimum. I appreciate the feedback,
my specialty lies more in layout and design than programming.
Dave Martin
In article <350cf08e...@news.tamu.edu>, flowm...@tamu.SPAMSUX.edu
(John "BigDog" Cunningham) wrote:
} I am planning
} to go back and fix the old versions, not to worry. I am also working
} so time is a problem.
I hadn't realized that you were a student worker. It explains a lot,
particularly the "snaz" before form and/or function. If PowerPoint exported
JPEG or GIF images, then all you have to do is create a simple HTML shell
page, with an IMG SRC for the first slide, a META tag with the time delay
and URL of the next slide, and a Next/Prev link. Copy this text file for
each slide, then change the references as appropriate. Quick and easy,
works for just about everyone (a slide show just doesn't work too well for
Lynx viewers, of course, but that's fine, and the count of those still
using a browser so old it won't read JPEG should be rather low).
When time is short--and I know all about having less time to do the things
you want than you need--make it work first. It can be ugly, even, if it
works. Worry about making it look good (Prev/Next graphical buttons, etc.),
or being neat, the next week. You do a good job on the general design and
layout, but learning restraint is just as important.
} I must admit that I have added on things that were too "snazzy" for
} resume purposes.
Again, you can do "snazzy" on other, less public, pages for personal
experience and still put it on a resume. Heck, you can put anything on your
resume, then learn it as called for. But to make a page potentially
inaccessible to those that need it, all for the sake of your resume, is
unnecessary. Show your versatility--make one page, the public one, without
all the extras, and another with all the snaz you can cough up.
} The only JavaScript part that's neccesary to
} view the page is the menu, which is the same one used by the new
} tamu.edu page. JavaScript is the best way to do this with frames,
} which were an integral part of design process of this web. It is
} compatible with Netscape and IE v3.
One reason (of many) that the TAMU main page is poorly done. Note that
JavaScript is not the "best way". If you don't have the ability to run CGIs
of some sort on the server (usually, because it isn't your server, so you
cannot add them), JavaScript is a way to push the stuff onto the client,
though that leaves those with older browsers, or with newer ones with
JavaScript disabled, unable to navigate unless an alternative is provided.
} Maybe an additional "FA proffesional" page is
} neccesary, but like I said, time is an issue.
Granted. Just a suggestion that might clear up some confusion and allow for
different approaches--more "fun" stuff on the professional page, more
accessibility on the student page.
} I tried to keep graphics small, the background being one of them, in
} order to keep download time to a minimum. I appreciate the feedback,
} my specialty lies more in layout and design than programming.
Just don't make the web equivalent of the early DTP mistakes. Too often
people would use twenty billion fonts on a document because they could, or
because it looked neat. With web design, that "neat" factor causes overuse
of things that turn a potentially good page into a nightmare for the user.
Take a step back and consider the comments. Learn from it all. Like I've
said, you don't have to give up the JavaScript or other new stuff. Use them
as enhancements, not as key components of the page. Download Netscape 2.x
and see how much of the site you can get to...
John BigDog Cunningham
On Tue, 17 Mar 1998 06:14:40 -0600, mac...@tamu.edu (Dave Martin)
wrote:
>I hadn't realized that you were a student worker. It explains a lot,
>particularly the "snaz" before form and/or function. If PowerPoint exported
>JPEG or GIF images, then all you have to do is create a simple HTML shell
>page, with an IMG SRC for the first slide, a META tag with the time delay
>and URL of the next slide, and a Next/Prev link. Copy this text file for
>each slide, then change the references as appropriate. Quick and easy,
>works for just about everyone (a slide show just doesn't work too well for
>Lynx viewers, of course, but that's fine, and the count of those still
>using a browser so old it won't read JPEG should be rather low).
I know how to make the meta tags work, I just haven't yet. I'm off
work this week, and don't have access from home. It is in the works.
The JavaScript window on the simple slideshows was an easy way to not
have to deal with the background tile. My boss wanted things up fast,
and the department loves the way the new page is improving it's image.
I am going to change things around as soon as I get back.
>
>} I must admit that I have added on things that were too "snazzy" for
>} resume purposes.
>
>Again, you can do "snazzy" on other, less public, pages for personal
>experience and still put it on a resume. Heck, you can put anything on your
>resume, then learn it as called for. But to make a page potentially
>inaccessible to those that need it, all for the sake of your resume, is
>unnecessary. Show your versatility--make one page, the public one, without
>all the extras, and another with all the snaz you can cough up.
>
The "snazzy" stuff (when the low-tech slideshows are perfected) is
extra.
>} The only JavaScript part that's neccesary to
>} view the page is the menu, which is the same one used by the new
>} tamu.edu page. JavaScript is the best way to do this with frames,
>} which were an integral part of design process of this web. It is
>} compatible with Netscape and IE v3.
>
>One reason (of many) that the TAMU main page is poorly done. Note that
>JavaScript is not the "best way". If you don't have the ability to run CGIs
>of some sort on the server (usually, because it isn't your server, so you
>cannot add them), JavaScript is a way to push the stuff onto the client,
>though that leaves those with older browsers, or with newer ones with
>JavaScript disabled, unable to navigate unless an alternative is provided.
The only way I have found to do a pull down menu that changes a
different frame is with JavaScript. I have not found a Perl solution,
and the Tech at FA office has been too busy to install Perl for me
anyway, and the first thing I was asked to do when I was hired was to
make a "pull-down menu like the one on the new TAMU page".
>Just don't make the web equivalent of the early DTP mistakes.
Not to sound like an idiot, but what's DTP?
>Take a step back and consider the comments. Learn from it all. Like I've
>said, you don't have to give up the JavaScript or other new stuff. Use them
>as enhancements, not as key components of the page. Download Netscape 2.x
>and see how much of the site you can get to...
I tested everything on the page as it was made with Netscape and IE
4x, and Netscape 2x. I didn't test the slideshows until I got home,
which is when I realized the "low-tech" version wouldn't even pop up
in the window. I appreciate the comments.
Dave Martin
In article <350f779b....@news.tamu.edu>, flowm...@tamu.SPAMSUX.edu
(John "BigDog" Cunningham) wrote:
} The only way I have found to do a pull down menu that changes a
} different frame is with JavaScript. I have not found a Perl solution,
} and the Tech at FA office has been too busy to install Perl for me
} anyway, and the first thing I was asked to do when I was hired was to
} make a "pull-down menu like the one on the new TAMU page".
Oh, brother. I suppose I should apologize; I thought all of these whiz-bang
things were entirely your own ideas. Figures management types would be the
ones behind such an excessive and restrictive "feature". Perhaps you could
mention to them some of the problems--don't say you won't do it (you've
done it already), just point out some of the possible cons of placing neat
features before accessibility. Don't get yourself fired, though.
As for pull-down menus changing other frames, I'm not sure, since I've
never tried. I don't care much for frames (they are rarely done well, and
are really bad trips for those using older browsers). Hmm. Not exactly sure
how you could have a CGI replace the contents of just one specific frame.
You might have to have the CGI return the full frame definition for all the
frames, if done that way.
At the very least, consider adding a set of text links (or graphical
buttons) that replicate the links represented by the pop-up menu. It may be
redundant for those with the latest browsers (and with JavaScript on), but
a little redundancy provides for a wider range of supported browsers that
can access the pages.
} Not to sound like an idiot, but what's DTP?
Desktop Publishing. When it all started, people would throw every graphic
image and use every font in the world, because they could.
} I didn't test the slideshows until I got home,
} which is when I realized the "low-tech" version wouldn't even pop up
} in the window. I appreciate the comments.
No problem. And thanks for the honest responses. I may not agree with the
priorities (not exactly your fault, either), but it's good to know you plan
to look into improving the accessibility.
John BigDog Cunningham
On Wed, 18 Mar 1998 16:39:48 -0600, mac...@tamu.edu (Dave Martin)
>As for pull-down menus changing other frames, I'm not sure, since I've
>never tried. I don't care much for frames (they are rarely done well, and
>are really bad trips for those using older browsers). Hmm. Not exactly sure
>how you could have a CGI replace the contents of just one specific frame.
>You might have to have the CGI return the full frame definition for all the
>frames, if done that way.
Changing the entire frame set would be a huge pain. The JavaScript
menu works fine in Netscape 2 and up, although I didn't test it in ie
under 3x. It shoudn't be a problem
>
>At the very least, consider adding a set of text links (or graphical
>buttons) that replicate the links represented by the pop-up menu. It may be
>redundant for those with the latest browsers (and with JavaScript on), but
>a little redundancy provides for a wider range of supported browsers that
>can access the pages.
When I signed on for the job, they assured me that there would be
someone making a text version of the page when I was finished with the
graphical one. I have a bad feeling it won't happen, though.