10Things Not To Do on your Website - Do you Agree?

I got this list from here - http://www.vortex-webdesign.com/help/dontdoit.htm

I learnt something from this, its great logic - i found it when looking for ways to prevent right clik......:ph34r:
yet i question a few items mentioned (see bottom)
____________________________________________________________

1) Frames

Frames, in theory, are pure genius. In practice, however, they are frequently pure disaster.

Frames are commonly implemented in an attempt to simplify site navigation by keeping links in a handy, always accessible frame. This is almost always better accomplished by organizing information in a logical hierarchy and creating pages with simple, intuitive navigation.

Another common use (misuse!) of frames is to align images so that they connect seamlessly in a layout. In nearly every instance, this is the wrong approach. The use of carefully aligned images to create a layout is somewhat questionable in the first place (I would know!), but if it must be done it is far more reliable to use tables. Show me a site that uses frames to achieve a layout, and I'll show you a site that falls to pieces in many browsing environments.

Although support for frames on the web has improved in the last couple of years, the fundamental problems they create for users still exist. The difficulties with bookmarking, e-mailing a link to page within a frameset and search engine indexing should be given serious consideration before a frameset is used. Add to these the fact that many of the newest browsers allow the user to turn off frames support, and the fairly recent advent of hand-held devices that are used to access the web, the circumstances under which frames are actually a desirable option become rare indeed.

2) Scrolling Marquees

One of the most widely reviled features that can be implemented on a page is the scrolling marquee. This "stupid web trick" accomplishes absolutely nothing other than to provide a distraction and to make it difficult for the user to read the information contained within.

The scrolling marquee is generally employed by newbies who think it's "neat". Use of the scrolling marquee is sure to impress anyone who has less than one week of experience with the web. The other 99% of users will appreciate the fact that the designer has identified him/herself as clueless and will leave the site with great haste, never to return, except possibly for a laugh.

3) Anything that blinks

Another "stupid web trick". The rule-of-thumb here is that just because you can do it, that doesn't mean you should. When people visit a site, their purpose is to read the information presented. Whether it be for research, entertainment or otherwise, the addition of blinking text or animations does nothing except distract the user and make it difficult for them to access your information. Many users will register their annoyance by avoiding your site at all costs.

There are exceptions to this rule. If the blink is subtle enough, it can be used to draw the visitor's attention without distracting them as they try to read. This can be achieved through the use of an animated gif. Use of the <blink> tag is to be avoided at all costs.

4) The dreaded Lake Applet

The Lake Applet was an interesting curiosity a few years ago. Visitors to sites using the applet were suitably impressed the first time they saw it. The second time they saw it, it was boring. The third time they saw it, it was mildly annoying. Further encounters with the Lake Applet resulted in uncontrollable fits of rage as they waited (and waited, and waited) for the cursed thing to load.

At the time of this writing, the Lake Applet is largely regarded as pointless, hack, overused, trite and an enormous waste of time and bandwidth. This applies to other water-related applets as well. Indeed, it applies to the use of applets in general, since Java has not kept it's promise of becoming an accepted standard.

5) Animated Cursors

Most computers allow the user to select the cursor they wish to use. People choose a cursor they like and works well for them. Many people do not appreciate it when a web site hijacks their chosen cursor setting and overrides it for no good reason other than that the author of the site thinks their cursor is better. (Reiterating the rule-of-thumb: if you add a feature to a page whose sole function is to be "neat" or "cool", you may rest assured that it is neither of those things).

6) Spawning new windows

Opening new windows on the user's computer has its place and can be done effectively. Effectively means that the link that spawns a new window is clearly labeled as one that does so. Links that spawn new windows but don't provide such a warning are considered to be rude. The unexpected opening of a new window frequently results in the immediate closing of the new window, usually before any content even has a chance to load in it. This sequence of actions is normally followed by the user quickly leaving the site that saw fit to launch a "surprise" window, never to return.

7) Anything that "pops up" without warning

This applies to new windows, javascript alerts and prompts, and various annoying DHTML gizmos. The implementation of anything that pops up unexpectedly is an inconvenience to the user who must now take some action in order to remove the offending object from their screen.

8) Removing or restricting the users' controls

Many browsers allow a great deal of configuration and customization in order to provide users with controls they prefer. Employing JavaScript to eliminate toolbars, back and forward buttons and various other features of the users' chosen browser is inconsiderate and rude. It is never wise to force your preferences on the user, particularly when your preferences override the user's chosen settings. Never assume that you know what kind of features the user would like to have in his/her browsing environment better than he/she does.

9) Hijacking the status bar

Displaying messages in the status bar of the visitor's browser is not only rude, it is also unnecessary and even somewhat suspicious. If you have a message you would like the user to read, put it on the page. The function of the status bar is to display the URLs of the hyperlinks on a page. Interrupting this function may arouse suspicion in the user in that they may wonder why the site is trying to hide that information from them.

This trick is commonly used by adult sites and pay-per-click sites to fool the visitor into going somewhere they did not want to go. Experienced surfers know this and they will not click a link whose address is not displayed in the status bar.

10) Disabling right-click

This is quite possibly the single most clueless feature an author can add to a page. It is usually done under the misapprehension that it will prevent the user from viewing source code or saving images from a page. Not only does disabling right-click achieve neither of those things, it actually encourages them. Circumventing this attempt at security usually takes about two seconds or less, using one of the following methods:

A) Click with both mouse buttons simultaneously B) Press the "menu" button on a Windows keyboard (next to the right 'ctrl' button). C) Hold down the right mouse button, answer the prompt by pressing 'enter', then release the right mouse button. D) Turn off javascript in the browser. (This is rarely, if ever, necessary).

In the case of 'protecting' graphics, the right mouse button is not needed to save them, so disabling it serves no purpose at all:

A) *Left click* on the image and drag it off of the page into a graphics program or a local folder. B) Hit the printscreen button on the keyboard, open a graphics program such as Paint Shop Pro and go Edit>Paste As New Image. C) Retrieve the image from the browser cache. D) View the page source and go directly to the url of the image. E) Turn off javascript in the browser.

In addition to being completely worthless as a means of security, disabling right-click also makes it impossible for many people to use your site at all. Some browsers use the right mouse button as a means of accessing your information. Without it, your page may be rendered completely inaccessable to many users. Left handed people sometimes reverse the function of their mouse buttons so that the right button is used to click links. On a page where the author has attempted to interfere with right clicks, those users will not be able to navigate.

The right mouse button has a number of other functions besides 'view source' and 'save as'. The author who knows what those functions are would never consider trying to disable it. The author who doesn't understand the importance of those functions probably shouldn't be trying to disrupt them.

There is one very useful feature of disabling right-click on a site, however. It provides a quick and easy way for the visitor to identify the creator of a site as a person of severely diminished mental capacity.

See also: Ten more things to avoid


____________________________________________________________




1:Frames: i havent started using them yet but even Adobe uses them if you look on Help in Adobe Photoshop - it doesnt bother me at all-but i heard from others here that it should be avoided

6 & 7 "Spawning new windows & Pops up without warning"
i disagree with this in "some" cases because if you have links on your site - and the viewer cliks it - itll Normally override your site and the viewer has to go back see your site-by that time its already too late.
Most Flash sites create a New (popup)Windows to show the movie etc.and there are never any controls.
As in my sig site - having a new window pop up it ensures the viewers dont loose your Page...(which is gooooooood). to some extent i find it even more proffesional...(noob thought?) btw: do popup stoppers prevent the opening of new window after a clik of a link?

8. restricting the users' controls
as with 6&7 above - if showing a movie or a page which should be shown with purity only, removing controls/statusbar etc can in some cases only make the page/movie/piece more perfect (ie images etc) ?

4.Lake Applet
i dont know what is-so i guess thats good

For the rest i totally agree - most commercial sites should read this list.
The p0rn industry regards this list as.... things you Must do....:P :huh:

I pretty much agree with all ten points. ;)

Number 4, 'The dreaded lake applet' is a horrible java effect that I used to encounter online with monotonous regularity.
Thankfully most people seem to be over that fad now.

Here's an example of it: http://www.buddycom.com/WebGuru/Java...12/anlake.html
Sounds cool in theory, but in reality, just looks shite and takes too long to load with dialup.

Here's another good resource for learning what not to do when creating websites: http://www.websitesthatsuck.com/

I agree with all the points myself. :)

Though that's mainly because I'm a simplist - I prefer quality information in a nice, clean layout rather than a site that needs all the fecking bells & whistles :D

I'm not great at web design but I've picked up that most of those things shouldn't be used. Most of its common sense though and I do find myself frowning when pages feature some or all of those things.

I do use frames (iframes) on some pages but that so I can update on page in the root of a folder and have that change reflected on all the pages in a site.

I've found pages like http://www.w3.org/ useful in finding out stuff that makes a page more acceptable to most visitors (using different browsers etc) :)

I'm guilty of using frames for a navigation bar that goes across a top of my site. :(

But it does the job so I ain't complaining.

I don't know any other way of doing what frames do than using frames.

look at my "the new everything guide" (link in sig) and see what i mean.

I'm still working on making it look better though.


The rest of those points i completely agree with (who wouldnt?).

you can do that with css and <div> tags - check out www.ianrhodgson.co.uk/links.php - there i use <div>s...i could easily make the right hand bit scroll by itself, but i prefer not to...its just a line of code.

search w3c for the css section

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vivitron 15

you can do that with css and <div> tags - check out www.ianrhodgson.co.uk/links.php - there i use <div>s...i could easily make the right hand bit scroll by itself, but i prefer not to...its just a line of code.

search w3c for the css section

---

that's good. Exactly like i want mine. Just can't figure out how to do it. :(

I agree with all the points.. except the one about frames. Frames are OK when used properly and sensibly.


One thing though, in commercial sites where you are taking credit card payments and the like, it can be advisable to make some attempt to block the use of the browser back button, for both security purposes, and to avoid processing the payment twice. (Even if all you do is display a "Page Invalid" message)

I have absolutly no problem with the way Roscco is using frames

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 15%

I have absolutly no problem with the way Roscco is using frames

---

:01:
do you have an example of bad frames. :blink:

the problem with frames is if i follow a link to your page (maybe through google) then i may indeed end up at a frame and not at the whole page - thus i lose the concept of the site existing as more than one page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vivitron 15

the problem with frames is if i follow a link to your page (maybe through google) then i may indeed end up at a frame and not at the whole page - thus i lose the concept of the site existing as more than one page.

---

Surely that's the fault of Google then, not of Rossco's site.. :huh:

k, but what about if i go there through a hyperlink - say i use the url from a hotlinked picture, and end up like this?

Quote:

---

Bookmarks and links
You cannot link a framed page properly. If you link the whole page, you will most times get to the home page of the site. You won't get to see the page you're really interested in. If you link the page itself, the layout and links of the page are missing. You will end up with a crippled page.

Frame busters
Some web designers use javascripts, that will load the full frameset, when a sub page is loaded. To show the full layout or to protect the page from being used in another frameset, hiding its origin. People have been sued over that. And that gets you the home page again. There is no proper way to link to the information you wanted to link. A real killer of the web's basic concept.

<script language="JavaScript">
<!-- frame buster
if (window != window.top)
top.location.href = location.href;
// -->
</script>

Complexity
At first sight a framed site may look simple. You don't have to repeat the navigation code, for example. It has its own spot and needs only to be put on one page. This is true for a site with a handfull of pages. But more pages need more navigation bars. When you get to hundreds of pages and dozens of bars, then which belongs to which? It's easy to get lost.

Downloading
Sometimes you see a page you want to keep, to read it again. So you download the page the subject you want is on. The entire layout is lost. If the information is divided over several frames, you will lose a part. The context is also lost, since there are no links, or at least not all of them, and probably no title.

Fragmenting
A fundamental concept in web design is the unit of information. A web page should contain a concise, complete amount of it. With a start, a beginning and an end. A framed setup breaks with this rule. The information is often divided over several pages.

Load time
Frames take more time to load than a single page. First the top page is loaded and interpreted. After that the sub pages are called and loaded. You need three or more connections to get the entire page. With bad connections you may end up with a gray area on your page. Apart from that frames themselves take your browser noticably longer to render than a single page.

Flashing
The seperate loading of pages may cause an unpleasant flashing effect. First the default browser color, then the page background color, then the background image, then the images on the page. Multiplied by the number of frames. Just a matter of taste I guess, but I don't like it.

To be or not to be
Some HTML editors put a style attribute into a frame tag by default. Several browsers don't reckognize this, making your site completely invisible. I've seen (?) a lot of them.

---

google it - there are 101 reasons frames are awful - not least being much less flexible to use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rossco_2004

:01:
do you have an example of bad frames. :blink:

---

Right here. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by uNz[i]

Right here. ;)

---

:lol: that's pretty bad. :blink:

I agree with everything there.
yes, frames are vomitous.

1) Frames Dont use them, use mostly Tables anyways.

2) Scrolling Marquees They do suck.

3) Anything that blinks I use it very very lightly, generally it sucks

4) The dreaded Lake Applet Looks shitty from the example though Ive never used it
.
5) Animated Cursors Agree fkin stupid

6) Spawning new windows I use new windows on links that leaves my site which are very few.

7) Anything that "pops up" without warning Annoying and dont use and only belong on bullshit sites.

8) Removing or restricting the users' controls Why bother is right.

9) Hijacking the status bar Stupid also.

10) Disabling right-click Very stupid...

I agree with everything except the scrolling marquees, I've seen them used very effectively on some sites and they look great. This one site I used to visit was designed so that the marquee would scroll across a small LCD type screen made just for it, and every day it would display those users who were having a birthday. It was pretty cool to see your name scrolling across the top of the front page, and it looked and worked great.

But yeah too many people do just throw em on their site w/o thinking. But with some effort they can really add to your site.

just found another site with out of control Frames - http://adaweb.walkerart.org/home.shtml

Frames are absolutely terrible, layers are the way to go.