Kathy and Cheryl, I don't agree. In any good software development organization, there is a process for requirements engineering. The programmers do not necessarily have to be subject matter experts, but others in the organization take in all the inputs from marketing, sales, support, testing, and users and create specifications for new features, minor enhancements, and even non-trivial defect repairs. The programmers can help refine the specs, based on what is feasible, but they don't own the product requirements.
And what are the requirements? I think that the LUG community mostly agrees that Millennia should not devote too much effort to things like word processing features and fancy web page design. But there is a difference between a 'plain vanilla' web site and one that is difficult to read. I realize that Millennia is a small shop and some of the above roles are combined. But something like unbalanced font sizes can be fixed if the people responsible for user requirements make it a priority. It doesn't matter if the programmer who first implemented it failed to appreciate that it looked bad, especially if the cause was a defect (e.g., incorrectly nested html tables). Ward -----Original Message----- From: singhals Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 10:29 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Webpages 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
