-
Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Okay I can see that XWD can design some interesting web pages and can do things that other web design progs can't but...
So far as I can see there is no easy way to insert basic HTML - paragraphs <p>, headings <h1>, <h2> etc and where are the bulleted lists <ul> and <ol>?
Aside from the obvious use of bulleted lists they are also a means of structuring navigation menus. XWD is the only web tool I have seen that does not have the familiar toolbar button to add a bulleted list.
Headings are used to give levels of importance to the text and should, if done properly, give the document a structure. When I look at the code for any of the template pages, all the text is split into DIVs - not headings, sentences or paragraphs, just snippets of text. When a human looks at that web page the structure is obvious but for Google and screen readers there is nothing in the HTML to indicate the structure of the document!
What about tables? Okay they get bad press but that is because they have been misused for years, as a method of structuring and designing a web page rather than for their original purpose of providing a means to layout tabular data. Tables have tags to denote titles and headings, giving structure and meaning to tabular content - how is this to be achieved correctly in XWD
It is possible to use placeholders to insert HTML but it seems strange that it is easier to insert rotated text in a fancy box and see the end result as you edit than it is to insert a simple bulleted list or heading that has to be previewed to see the end result.
It is considered good practice to keep the formatting of a document separate from the document content. CSS should be in an external style sheet and inline styles should be avoided.
XWD pages use an external style sheet but then adds a ton of inline styles for positioning and setting fonts and fixed font sizes. There are accessibility issues with the use of fixed font sizes. The HTML is not easy to read and harks back to the bad old days of Frontpage.
Sorry for this long rant. I love Xara stuff AND I have bought XWD but I am concerned about the non-standard method of coding the web pages.
Cheers
Ron
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
I must admit, from a coders viewpoint it does look complicated if you want to tweak it with dhtml / javascript and other things. I know you can use placeholders but sometimes behind-the-scenes coding is a must.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Hi Ron,
Quote:
Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
I'm not on a crusade here but just want to make the point there's more than one way to skin a cat. You can can go from John Rayner (who's missing in action lately) who's a pure text based html coder, to users of Dreamweaver which I suppose you could loosely call a WYSIWYG editor to users of Flash (includes me) which never in a month of Sundays could create editable html or structure, nor needs too.
With XWD you set out your web site designs in a graphical way, and export from there. If there's an error, you change the graphical layout (in the main) and reexport. Check, check, etc.
No you can't edit as say you could a DW export, but DW doesn't give you the graphical control (without complicated menu options) that XWD offers.
It's more horses for courses and does it deliver on the day. ;-)
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
For anyone that has a need to work with the code, export to website from Web Designer. Then use your favorite text/code editor, whether notepad, Dreamweaver, Expression Web, etc.
Web Designer was written more for those people that do not want or have a need to edit the code.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
While not an experienced HTML coder, I can definitely see advantages to inclution of web-standard text-manipulation methods in xWB (which I've now purchased). Consider, as a single point of argument, the ability to increase/decrease text size of a website, based on user preference. Clicking an "A+" or an "A-" tool to manipulate text size is an option offered by CCS. Without [extemded] standard HTML text formatting specification, this is not an option. Can text styles be defined, and block-manipulated with xWD to offer similar functionality?
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
I think that you are looking at this from the wrong standpoint ....
XWD is a "Web" development tool NOT a "Code" Development tool. It's main object is to produce a perfect web representation of the image that you want to see. Forget the traditional code .... if you want bullets, add them into the text. The intent is that the "Artist" producing the website doesn't need to know how this works, just that it gives him what he wants ... a website picture that looks exactly as it was envisaged!
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Hi Xara Web Designer exports documents as XHTML and uses a transitional DOCTYPE allowing for W3C valid XHTML files to be exported.
The positioning of objects within the exported page is managed using absolute positioned divs. The program exports fixed width and fixed positioned pages. This means that a page will display the same size at any resolution.
Tags such as <p>, <h1> etc are only used for formatting and web crawlers will have no problems reading a page which does not use these tags.
Yes <ul> and <li> tags are used as a means of structuring navigation when creating css menus for for example but Web Designer provides you with button/ menu templates and you can create your own buttons too so navigation is handled within the program.
A web page does not need to have tables. Tables were originally made for data structure rather than layout and there are many advantages of using divs instead of tables
Hope this helps!
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Well, it looks like it's a time to talk about concepts. So the straight answer to the question: "Where's the HTML and where's the structure?" is "Somewhere inside a black box which you should not care about." :)
Do you also ask where is the "PostScript code" when you create graphics? I don't think so. Our approach is to eliminate the need of designer to see or alter any code at all. And to stop him worry about how it looks. After all, what's important is - how you design it, and how users see it. Why should designers or users care about how it is processed by their hardware/software? This is a problem of the programmers.
As I say, this is a concept. We feel that html is mature enough to close it's childhood page and get rid of manual editing. Most information types has grown through this stage - first raster images were coded manually on per pixel basis but no one does this today, first formatted text was coded manually (quite similar to html), but no one does this today, PostScript was edited manually but none does it today...
Yes, there is a strong dominating trend that html has and is supposed to be created manually (or near so). There even a lot of "guidelines" and "rules of thumb" mostly created by the mature, highly experienced html coders. But then again - this all is like advices on how is it better to write your RTF or LaTeX well formatted book using a plain text editor. As soon as you get Word, you don't need them any more.
The WD is a first step in this direction.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Now some comments. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
So far as I can see there is no easy way to insert basic HTML - paragraphs <p>, headings <h1>, <h2> etc and where are the bulleted lists <ul> and <ol>?
Aside from the obvious use of bulleted lists they are also a means of structuring navigation menus. XWD is the only web tool I have seen that does not have the familiar toolbar button to add a bulleted list.
Headings are used to give levels of importance to the text and should, if done properly, give the document a structure. When I look at the code for any of the template pages, all the text is split into DIVs - not headings, sentences or paragraphs, just snippets of text. When a human looks at that web page the structure is obvious but for Google and screen readers there is nothing in the HTML to indicate the structure of the document!
When you read a hard printed book, how do you denote structure? There are no hidden tags. The Google, of course need hints, but what for? The rating of your site is mostly determined not on the structure of your html but on the relations from other sites.
After all, the final goal of site creation is to make reader see what we want him to see. He will not open document source to find out that this particular line of text is marked as a header right? So only outlook has a meaning.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
What about tables? Okay they get bad press but that is because they have been misused for years, as a method of structuring and designing a web page rather than for their original purpose of providing a means to layout tabular data. Tables have tags to denote titles and headings, giving structure and meaning to tabular content - how is this to be achieved correctly in XWD
There's no need in table if you can place anything anywhere. Well, the tables implementation in editor (like in Word) is useful to simplify creation of large regular tables, but why should anyone care how this is represented within the html as long as reader see exactly what you want him to see?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
It is possible to use placeholders to insert HTML but it seems strange that it is easier to insert rotated text in a fancy box and see the end result as you edit than it is to insert a simple bulleted list or heading that has to be previewed to see the end result.
:D Exactly! It is "strange" because of the habits you have. You need bullet? Draw one! Just like we all learn from the childhood. If you want to see something - draw it! That simple. You can do it easily in WD, but as you want to add similar shape somewhere else with different purpose, it's still just as simple in WD, but a lot of pain in html coding approach. After all, the bullets are just automation of one of the hard cases. While drawing software is an automation for all possible cases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
It is considered good practice to keep the formatting of a document separate from the document content. CSS should be in an external style sheet and inline styles should be avoided.
That's right - this is one of those rules of thumb useful for hand coding. But if do not hand code this becomes completely meaningless. Just like a source tab formatting of the RTF when you use Word to edit it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
There are accessibility issues with the use of fixed font sizes.
This is partly true. Mostly for old browsers that do font scaling. New browsers zoom entire page which is a real solution of the accessibility problem. The font scaling is a relict form times of Mosaic when computers were simply too slow, and browser software to primitive to be able to scale graphics.
Besides, taking this approach, all printed materials have much more accessibility issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
The HTML is not easy to read and
Because it is created for browsing, not for reading. ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
harks back to the bad old days of Frontpage.
This is not true. We produce W3C compliant XHTML code. It's quality is actually higher then most sites you have out there, including many large ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
I am concerned about the non-standard method of coding the web pages.
WD is not a tool for coding web pages, but for designing them. ;)
If you want to enjoy the process of coding - you have to use other tools.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
I sense a religious war brewing... :cool:
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
covoxer
Well, it looks like it's a time to talk about concepts.
Hi John,
I understand fully the goals of XWD. As one who leans toward coding because it gives ultimate control of the outcome, I'm torn. Nonetheless, I respect what you are trying to accomplish. Like it or not, some things in XWD are just plain convoluted or at best clumsy. But the fact that a non-coder can accomplish them, is saying something. Those who know code and expect any tool to create code that is as concise and efficient as what can be hand coded, are always going to be disappointed. This is a visual tool. Period. What's under the hood doesn't matter, as long as the car gets you there...
However I do think you need to distinguish between tables and bulleted lists as structure tools v.s. design elements. All modern publishing tools give you the ability to easily create bulleted lists or to display tabular data. Xara is much less friendly and intuitive in these areas and I think in time you will need to address it. Whether the underlying code is an html table or bulleted list, is irrelevant. But the ability to create them on screen is not. Consider that the infamous "text underline" was only recently added to Xara, as well as spell check. Both are common tools for document creation that Xara recognized as necessary components of "design".
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Yes, as I say - it's a first step. :)
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
covoxer
Just like we all learn from the childhood. If you want to see something - draw it! That simple.
THIS is what I like about the whole process.
I can't code, but that doesn't mean I'm not creative enough to draw.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
It is really simple to sort this, design and build the site exactly how you want it, QUICKLY, save it and open it up again in DW or EWeb to do any tweaks you fancy. This works perfectly.:)
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
My arguments are not about whether it is better to be able to code by hand or use a WYSISYG app. Whichever method you use there will be an HTML page, full of code. My argument is about the lack of HTML and structure in WXD pages.
The W3C develop the HTML language and they determine what the vocabulary is and how it should be used. They give us ways to identify headings, bullets, tabular data etc. The tags are there for good reason.
XWD has done away with the vocabulary of HTML and just uses positioning divs and fixed font sizes. So, why is that a problem?
I stated earlier that most people would be able to determine headings, bullet points, structure etc of a web page just by looking at it and that has been pointed out again in a few other posts. However, there are many people who can't look at a web page - no matter how big the font is. Blind and seriously visually impaired people use screen reading software to help them get content from the web - screen reading software actually reads the HTML content of the web page, not the screen itself - see the link below as to why we need to have headings, bulleted lists etc and why structure is important.
http://www.webcredible.co.uk/user-fr...-readers.shtml
It is also worth mentioning that in many cases it is a legal requirement to make websites accessible - see the RNIB site http://www.rnib.org.uk/xpedio/groups...legalcase.hcsp
MikeM - I tried exporting and then editing in EW2 but I won't be doing that again ;)
Covoxer - You make a lot of good points but why should I have to draw my own bullets when HTML provides nestable ordered and unordered lists with definable bullet characters, including images? Xara make a point of avoiding bullets in their software - you can't DTP them either! :)
- Bulleted lists
- are great
- and even
- this editor supports them!
as easy as
- one
- two
- three
Ron
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
No one argues that having automatic bullet or numbered lists would be a worthwhile addition. It's on the wish-list. It will get done at some point.
But I'd argue that the point about HTML structure is not valid. The tags only exist because back-along you created websites by hand, hacking the HTML and the only way to add a heading (or something as simple as italic) was by adding embedded tag commands. They only exist through a dint of history. It was the exactly same with old word processors, before they went WYSIWYG. Same with DTP programs, but how many people use TeX now? WYSIWYG design tools have made the whole manual mark-up redundant.
There is no value in having HTML 'structure'. Search engines do not use it - they care only about the text (some people mistakenly believe, and spread the myth, that is matters to search engines - it does not). All they care about is that text. By all accounts Google doesn't even look at very specific metadata, the keywords metatag, so they are not going to pay attention to <H1>. There is no value in the 'vocabulary of HTML' as you put it.
So in fact as and when we implement easy bullet lists we probably will not do it with the <li> tag even, but our own way so that designers have accurate, predictable, WYSIWYG lists. I can see little value in using the <li> when what people really care about is that the lists looks right, and exactly as they intend on all browsers.
As to the 'accessibility' point this is mute point as all mainstream browsers have moved to full page zoom where everything on the page zooms (like in Xara). This is a better solution for everyone, blind or not, because then everything gets bigger in proportion and you can zoom into graphics, photos and text. And designers are happy because their page remains completely intact as intended, just bigger.
So the only browser that do not implement full page zoom (Chrome and Safari) are switching to it real soon now. Problem solved.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Charles Moir
As to the 'accessibility' point this is mute point as all mainstream browsers have moved to full page zoom where everything on the page zooms (like in Xara). This is a better solution for everyone, blind or not, because then everything gets bigger in proportion and you can zoom into graphics, photos and text. And designers are happy because their page remains completely intact as intended, just bigger.
Ron (Hexen33) was talking about blind people. Blind people will not zoom (they are not able to interprete your generated DIV tag soap, if they zoom in or out, because they are blind).
Remi
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
I thought that was a bit of an odd paragraph. 'As long as you can zoom right in, blind people should be ok.' http://www3.b92.net/ipb_images/style...efault/huh.gif
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Yeah, sorry I really meant 'visually challenged' which is actually a pretty significant proportion of the population, who like to magnify things.
For really blind, let's assume they are using computer readers, then I think the same point still applies, they read the text in the HTML and will ignore pretty much all the HTML structure.
Alt tags on pictures or graphics are one of the few bits of meta information that really are valuable, to search engines and readers alike. But we have an easy way of adding those to pictures.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Charles Moir
For really blind, let's assume they are using computer readers, then I think the same point still applies, they read the text in the HTML and will ignore pretty much all the HTML structure.
Sorry, but that's wrong. You should do your homework, because "a growing number of countries around the world have introduced legislation which either directly addresses the need for websites and other forms of communication to be accessible to people with disabilities, or which addresses the more general requirement for people with disabilities not to be discriminated against.
In the UK, the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) does not refer explicitly to website accessibility, but makes it illegal to discriminate against people with disabilities. The DDA applies to anyone providing a service; public, private and voluntary sectors. The Code of Practice: Rights of Access - Goods, Facilities, Services and Premises document[8] published by the government's Disability Rights Commission to accompany the Act does refer explicitly to websites as one of the "services to the public" which should be considered covered by the Act." [source: Wikipedia article about Web accessibility]
Remi
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Would that apply to all websites?
This would mean that any portfolio of an artist would be shut down as the info is graphical and mostly not textual.
Simply make a redirect-option as one would for flash/mobile sites and have a plain textual page with the acknowledgment and explanation what the site is about.
Hans
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Some good points Ron. Especially regarding accessibility. It's true that there are blind people that use voice readers browsing html. But it's not true that simply adding headers or bullets automatically makes a page perfectly readable by them. It much more depends on the amount of text on the page and number of text blocks. It also depends on the content of the text. It may be explicit and independent of the page layout and graphics or hard to understand. The alt text for images is also important here. So, generally, if you want to produce accessible page (I don't mean technical term but real one), you have to work hard on the correct design in the first place.
As a result, accessible pages are usually not attractive for visual browsing as design is hampered with necessary constraints.
On the other hand, even technically accessible pages are not always easy to understand using text browser. So the best approach is to develop separate versions of the site for text and graphical browsing. You can do both in WD.
Another aspect is that all printed literature (books, manuals, newspapers, magazines e.t.c.) are completely unaccessible by this criteria, since they can't be read by the blind without help of someone else. And in reality, the only really working solution in any conditions is let someone to read the text aloud and explain what's there.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
remi
Sorry, but that's wrong. You should do your homework, because "a growing number of countries around the world have introduced legislation which either directly addresses the need for websites and other forms of communication to be accessible to people with disabilities, or which addresses the more general requirement for people with disabilities not to be discriminated against.
In the UK, the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) does not refer explicitly to website accessibility, but makes it illegal to discriminate against people with disabilities. The DDA applies to anyone providing a service; public, private and voluntary sectors. The Code of Practice: Rights of Access - Goods, Facilities, Services and Premises document[8] published by the government's Disability Rights Commission to accompany the Act does refer explicitly to websites as one of the "services to the public" which should be considered covered by the Act." [source: Wikipedia article about
Web accessibility]
Remi
And how this applies to the all product information on labels, manuals and documentation? Can blind read them? Is this discrimination too?
Nevertheless, as I say, it all depends on designer. If you want to make a 100% accessible site, you can do it in WD.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
No, John. Ron's main point in this thread was semantically meaningful HTML. This is an important point if we're talking about Web accessibility. Are you really able to create this in WD?
Remi
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Isn't it possible to create a option for the browser to preview in?
So we could select IE and FF(or others) as FF renders fonts differently as other browsers.
Then we could install LYNX text browser to test the site
Could you build in a browser-detection script in the head-tag?
this to be able to redirect to the textual part of the site?
Hans
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
remi
No, John. Ron's main point in this thread was semantically meaningful HTML. This is an important point if we're talking about Web accessibility. Are you really able to create this in WD?
Remi
Sure, why not, put it into a placeholder. Hide it on invisible layer if you don't want it to mess the design. Or create a separate version of the site, which is actually a best solution because pure text predesigned for text reading is much easier to understand than typical design, even if it is technically accessible.
And answer please about the accessibility of all printed materials, information tables in public places e.t.c.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
There is nothing in the HTML we create that stops readers working.
The main criteria for Accessibility concerns providing things like alternative text for graphics, links, audio, not using using colour to impart important information etc. All this is possible if you so wish.
And for the 'tag soup' comment you must be looking at some other products or web pages. Our pages are incredibly simple HTML, one line after another and not a lot else. Try looking at the HTML produced by other web authoring tools or indeed look at any typically complex website if you really want to see indecipherable tag soup.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
A knowledged (X)HTML/CSS expert would use the following simple markup:
Code:
<p>The following is an example streaming video.
It's easy to embed your own YouTube videos, or any of
the tens of thousands of third party 'web widgets'
using the Placeholder feature. Most web widgets provide
a short snippet of HTML that you can attach to a graphic.
So the following rectangle acts as a placeholder for the
streaming video. To see the actual HTML snippet used,
open the Web Properties dialog and look at the Placeholder
tab.</p>
But, no you're on your WYSIWYG absolute position trip, don't care about semantic HTML and prefer to export a tag soup par excellence:
Code:
<div style=" font-size: 12px; font-weight: normal;">
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 5px;">The following is an example streaming video. It’s easy to embed your own YouTube videos, or any of the tens of thousands </div>
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 22px;">of third party ‘web widgets’ using the Placeholder feature. Most web widgets provide a short snippet of HTML that you </div>
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 39px;">can attach to a graphic. So the following rectangle acts as a placeholder for the streaming video. To see the actual HTML </div>
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 56px;">snippet used, open the Web Properties dialog and look at the Placeholder tab.</div>
</div>
The problem is, you're lost in the idea to export a page the same as it's shown on Xara's canvas (the so often discussed WYSIWYG principle).
Remi
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Tag Soup? Using standard HTML tags (HTML is a markup language, so without tags there's no markup) should make the page easily readable by humans even within the code. Here is a boring exerpt from one of my pages:
<h1>Writing Your Constitution</h1>
<h2 class="header" id="headings">Constitution Headings (also known as Clauses)</h2>
<p>Below are the headings which appear in most constitutions, with an explanation of what information usually comes under each one. This is only a guide though - only you will know whether it would need to be changed a bit for your individual organisation or group.</p>
<h3 class="sub1less">Name of the organisation</h3>
<p>A straightforward one to begin - just the full name of your organisation or group. It is worth mentioning here though that if your group would like to apply for charitable status in the future, then you should check the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator's (OSCR) website (www.oscr.org.uk) to make sure that the name you plan to use has not already been taken by another charity.</p>
<h3 class="sub1less">Aims and/or Objectives</h3>
<p>This clause might also seem fairly straightforward, but it is worth taking a bit of time to talk it through. You might have a definite idea of what your organisation or group wants to do now, but could the aims change with time? Once your constitution has been formerly accepted by the membership of the group, it will take more work to try to change it. It is better to take time at the beginning to decide on the aim or aims of the group, both for now and in the future.</p>
<p>If your group is interested in applying for Charitable Status, then you'll need to read OCSR's booklet, "Meeting the Charity Test" which includes a full list of Charitable Purposes under the Charities and Trustees Investment (Scotland) Act 2005.</p>
<h3 class="sub1less">Powers</h3>
<p>This section deals with the specific functions related to the group such as providing services or activities to further the aims and objectives. The Powers clause can also outline the group's ability to:</p>
<ul>
<li>Raise funds</li>
<li>Employ staff</li>
<li>Lease/hire or purchase property</li>
<li>Take out insurance</li>
<li>Liaise with other organisations</li>
</ul>
---
To me, the above seems fairly readable and illustrates the main heading <h1> at the top, with sections at a secondary level <h2> and within that, sub headings at level 3 <h3> Paragraphs are all <p> and I even included a dreaded bulleted list. The formatting of the page is all done from the external style sheet, with a body font size of 90% (so it can be scaled by browsers easily). Remember that some web pages have been around before IE8 and the latest FF arrived.
----
Here's 4 paras from Gary's explanation of the Toolbar:
<div style="">
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 197px;"><span style=" font-weight: bold;">The Website Toolbar</span>*There are 7 website-specific buttons at the top of the screen on the </div>
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 211px;">Infobar:</div>
</div>
<div style="">
</div>
<div style="">
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 239px;"><span style=" font-weight: bold;">1. Export & Preview Website</span>*This button publishes the website to your computer and opens </div>
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 252px;">a browser preview window in which you can preview your site.</div>
</div>
<div style="">
</div>
<div style="">
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 280px;"><span style=" font-weight: bold;">2. Export Website</span>*This button creates all the files and folders needed to publish your </div>
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 294px;">website to your website host. You do this step just before you publish your website to your </div>
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 308px;">web host’s servers.</div>
</div>
<div style="">
</div>
<div style="">
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 336px;"><span id="Link" style=" font-weight: bold;">3. Link</span>*This button opens the <span style=" font-weight: bold;">Website Properties</span>*menu but to the <span style=" font-weight: bold;">Links</span>*tabbed section. </div>
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 350px;">From the Links tabbed section you can add a variety of links both internal and external. You </div>
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 364px;">can link to a page on your website, an external website, a web image, an anchor, or a popup </div>
<div class="tl" style="left: 0px; top: 378px;">object. A picture is worth a thousand words. Click these links to see what they do.</div>
</div>
<div style="">
</div>
<div style="">
---
Yes you can find the text relatively easily but sentences and paras are broken at odd points and there is nothing to denote the structure.
More in next post.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
As for the need for printed materials having to meet accessibility requirements. All UK Councils would be expected to be able to produce any of their publications in a format suitable for visually impaired if requested (no you can't just photocopy onto A3).
In Adobe Acrobat there is a tool for making your pdfs accessible - http://www.adobe.com/accessibility/ (there's a bit in there about your US federal govt requirements as well).
In Word it is recommended that you do not use bold, italic etc to format paras but use styles (correctly) as these convey meaning to the text. http://www.webaim.org/techniques/word/
After all this... I am not trying to knock XWD - it is a fantastic tool that can easily produce graphically rich web pages and does things that only Flash could have achieved before. For a band's website or for showing off your artwork it would be great but for many text heavy sites that need structure I don't think it works.
Oh, and I'm no evangelist about disability issues - my pages are far from perfect but I try where I can. :)
Ron
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Sorry Remi I was too busy rambling to notice your post!
Ron
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
For a band's website or for showing off your artwork it would be great but for many text heavy sites that need structure I don't think it works.
If I may duck the incoming and make a remark: why would anyone else want to use WD in the first place? To me the two examples you cite represent nearly the sum total of why one has web pages in the first place, at least from my (graphics geek) perspective. If you work in other domains, great, and you shouldn't use this tool for such purposes--the "structure" you're endorsing seems pointless to me--again, why I'm the target demographic for this sort of software and you're not. To me the Design Is All. :D
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
remi
A knowledged (X)HTML/CSS expert would use the following simple markup:
....
But, no you're on your WYSIWYG absolute position trip, don't care about semantic HTML and prefer to export a tag soup par excellence:
....
The problem is, you're lost in the idea to export a page the same as it's shown on Xara's canvas (the so often discussed WYSIWYG principle).
The first one is a plain unformatted text which you can easily insert into placeholder. You don't need to use wysiwyg tools to enter unformatted text.
First one will look unpredictably in a browser, second one will look exactly how you want it too.
So what's the point of using first one if it has no advantages from the designers point of view?
Now back to the accessibility. Let's take an example.
Here's the site exported with WD without any particular attention to the accessibility by the author:
http://webdesigner.xara.com/
Here's the NVDA, open source, free voice reader software:
http://www.nvda-project.org/
Open this site in Opera for example, and read with NVDA.
Do you hear any influence of the tag mess?
Is this inaccessible site?
Try, and you'll see. Or hear actually. ;)
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
As for the need for printed materials having to meet accessibility requirements. All UK Councils would be expected to be able to produce any of their publications in a format suitable for visually impaired if requested (no you can't just photocopy onto A3).
This would not help blind to read it. And you can zoom any page in modern browsers for visually impaired, so where's the problem with accessibility of the WD exported pages?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hexen53
for many text heavy sites that need structure I don't think it works.
True.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
@John,
Did as you suggested and placed the <p>blabla</p> inside the placeholder.
It works but only the width is applied,meaning the totaltext is displayed
but is longer as the object(placeholder)is set to.
So using plain text in a placeholder doesn't fit the object representing the space.
This does work with pictures and flash
Hans
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spinny
If I may duck the incoming and make a remark: why would anyone else want to use WD in the first place? To me the two examples you cite represent nearly the sum total of why one has web pages in the first place, at least from my (graphics geek) perspective. If you work in other domains, great, and you shouldn't use this tool for such purposes--the "structure" you're endorsing seems pointless to me--again, why I'm the target demographic for this sort of software and you're not. To me the Design Is All. :D
Many of the organisations I work with have websites that provide infromation and support related to health issues, homelessness, drugs misuse etc. Many of them also want websites that they can manage by themselves. Typically, designer guys are pretty protective of their designs and don't usually want civilians messing up their work. For me, I would rather they can manage by themselves - perhaps another reason why XWD is not so suitable in these circumstances.
As for structure, how about a discography page for the band?
<h1>Satan's Kittens - Discography</h1>
<h2>Album 1 - Black Metal Psychos</h2>
<p>Recorded 1999 at Hell Studios</p>
<ul>
<li>Track1 - Crap overdose</li>
<li>More Crap</li>
</ul>
<h2>7" Single - We Are Sorry</h2>
<p>Recorded 2000 at Kitten Central</p>
<ul>
<li>Track1 - Love overdose</li>
<li>More Love</li>
</ul>
etc
Structure is everywhere.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
In a very real sense I hear you, Hexen. Still...
I'm a software engineer in my day job. I know from coding, and standards, and structure. I know enough HTML to be dangerous, and I wrote my Master's thesis in LaTeX with a text editor.
When I come home and do graphics stuff it's because I enjoy it, I want to be creative and see my imagination come to life, faithfully reproduced. If I never see a single jot of HTML code in the process, so much the better. Coding is tedious, it's work, and if I wanted that experience I'd never leave the office. Keep <h1> tags and all that, I just want it to show up right where I want it on the page, and I don't want to have to spend time counting pixels or tags to do it.
They made WD just for people like me.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
covoxer
This would not help blind to read it. And you can zoom any page in modern browsers for visually impaired, so where's the problem with accessibility of the WD exported pages?
True.
I worked in a library where we had a Braille printer. Unfortunately the printer didn't work - fortunately nobody ever asked for anything in Braille.
Zoom into your page 500% (some people may need it) and where is your design? Often visually impared users will just want the text in a very large font, in their preferred colours - structure helps.
Two or three times I have come under criticism for providing pdfs on my organisation's website as visually impaired users find them harder to work with than Word docs - even though you can zoom in 1000s of times in a pdf!
I am not an expert on accessibility issues but I have provided several links to sites that are recognised bodies. Also Adobe, Microsoft, W3C and governments all have the issue high on their agenda and produce guidelines on these matters. Here is a bit on Adobe CS4s Dreamweaver take on accessibility: http://www.adobe.com/accessibility/p.../overview.html
Ron
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Just as a point of clarification would either Remi or Hexen please tell me what is the exact point of this thead?
I do not see where Xara advertised the program as being a replacement for HTML editors or code formatter or anything other than a graphics design tool for web pages.
For what is advertised the program does the work very well.
Are you lobbying to have Xara change the purpose for the program?
Do you want it to replace any other tools you already use?
I'm just curious as to why so much effort and posting is being put forth.
-
Re: Where's the HTML and where's the structure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Spinny
When I come home and do graphics stuff it's because I enjoy it, I want to be creative and see my imagination come to life, faithfully reproduced. If I never see a single jot of HTML code in the process, so much the better. Coding is tedious, it's work, and if I wanted that experience I'd never leave the office. Keep <h1> tags and all that, I just want it to show up right where I want it on the page, and I don't want to have to spend time counting pixels or tags to do it.
They made WD just for people like me.
Okay, but I need a <p> :D