Yes, lordy! In addition to all Kathy's excellent points, some people don't like double-dutch-rockyroad-raspberry-swirl. Plain vanilla websites may not win design awards or many "likes" but they DO transmit information.
Cheryl Kathy Thompson wrote: > or perhaps the programmers are programmers and not web > designers. > > The two professions are totally different really - asking a > programmer to build a website would be like asking the > toaster to make the bread. > But yes, there are people out there who have the brain > skills to train and successfully do both, but perhaps we > don't have them on our Legacy team. > > From a personal point of view of the situation, and knowing > how much work goes into building just a basic site, and also > knowing how many different browsers there are and how often > they change and update, and how many different screen sizes > and operating systems and ..... I could go on but I won't, I > feel that although the website they have created is basic, > it suits the purpose of providing an HMTL format for webpage > display of a family tree. > They have provided us with the ability to have a surname > index that links directly to each possible person, they've > provided us with different pages for each generation, > they've even provided us with the ability to customise > background colour and different images for different > reasons, they've even provided us with the choice of > Ancestor or Generation, if we want living people included or > suppressed. > > If I personally sat down and created these pages from > scratch, and I know how to create webpages and websites, I'd > be easily looking at working at it non-stop for close to 4 > weeks, to write the code, to de-bug the code, to make sure > it worked with different sizes and configurations of family > trees, and to ensure it worked across multiple browsers, > operating systems and monitor sizes. > And that's without then writing it all into the program so > it can do it all for us in less than a minute. > > Now, if I have offended or upset anyone my my response here, > I am sorry, but having done University studies in both > programming and web design, and realising the Web Design was > hard enough and that programming wasn't for me, I do feel > that I have half an idea of what the Legacy team are going > through, and nagging really doesn't help. > > > > > > > > > > > On 18 September 2013 18:20, Mary Young <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > IMHO, this problem of inappropriate *relative* font > sizes, is not helped by increasing Zoom of the entire > web page. By the time the text in "Family Links" is > readable, the headers go from "large" to "ridiculously > large" etc. .. > My Legacy website was created in April 2006 and I've > found the unbalanced appearance of the font sizes > annoying from day one - as have others posting to the > Group. The problem could best be addressed by the > programmers. It would seem fairly simple to alter the > coding for a simple change to fixed, more balanced font > sizes (offering user-defined sizes would I assume be > more complicated). > Requests for a fix have been made over the years, but it > seems the programmers are not sufficiently interested in > presenting the program's best face via our Legacy websites. > Mary Young Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
