Re: [WSG] Shopping cart - who does what
> Do the free [shopping carts] (such as ZenCart and OsCommerce) do an adequate job ? My friend populated the shop at the time because he was savvy with Photoshop and could do all the image work himself. But you could as well end up doing that too if your client hasn't that knowledge. That's what I am afraid of. I think you should weigh your time vs. the fee your colleague charges. You might want to learn ZenCart or another eCommerce solution so you can do it in the future. Thanks, Jens - will re-think if a cart is really necessary. Kind regards Lyn *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Shopping cart - who does what
> Do the free [shopping carts] (such as ZenCart and OsCommerce) do an adequate job ? I once did a ZenCart job for a friend and found it extremely confusing. ZenCart has hundreds of options and if you're new to the software you should prepare for a lot of searching on the net. That said there are solutions for probably all of your problems and the community is helpful. ZenCart's template system is unusual as it requires you to create a separate folder with your project's name for each template you want to override - a scattered approach which adds to the confusion. You need to thoroughly document what you're doing or you will be searching again if the client needs changes in a few months time. I have spent many unpaid hours trying to figure out ZenCart. It's no surprise that there's a busy market of experts (or wannabes) who offer templates and solutions for you. My friend populated the shop at the time because he was savvy with Photoshop and could do all the image work himself. But you could as well end up doing that too if your client hasn't that knowledge. I think you should weigh your time vs. the fee your colleague charges. You might want to learn ZenCart or another eCommerce solution so you can do it in the future. Cheers, Jens The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or attached files. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Shopping cart - who does what
Have always avoided doing sites that needed a shopping cart but a new client will need one. I would appreciate some advice. Do the free ones (such as ZenCart and OsCommerce) do an adequate job or would I be better off advising my client to go for a paid one. I have a colleague who does custom-designed ones and I would be looking at about a minimum of $500. The second question is who does what? Once I have the cart (either a downloaded free one or a custom one) and it is uploaded to the website, who inputs the products etc? I imagine the client would need to be shown how to do this? What is the usual procedure? Thanks. Lyn Smith www.westernwebdesign.com.au Affordable web design - Perth, Western Australia *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] ARIA
On 10 Aug 2008, at 04:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It would be really nice, that instead of introducing more and more design element features like ARIA markup, that what is and isn't supported at different levels (HTML4 or HTML5 or XHTML), ARIA is about accessibility, not design. that w3c and the browser vendor's worked together to properly come to agreement on what should be used rather then what they want to make as they're own spin off. We are. WHAt-WG was a co-operation between three major browser vendors, and the work they produced in Web Applications 1.0 has been rolled into the W3C as HTML5. Apple have made a number of vendor specific extensions to CSS recently, but they've submitted them to the CSS WG for consideration for CSS3. I mean, look at what IE does to CSS, and then Opera uses the standards differently although much better. At least, as far as I can tell Mozilla are the only ones to get it completely right, but then even it has it's own quirks. :confused: You have an example? How do Opera treat standards worse than Mozilla? Opera probably has the least vendor specific CSS features of any major browser, and is at least on feature par with Safari and Mozilla. As far as I know Opera are the closest to full CSS2.1 support (only visibility: collapse missing in 9.5), and up there with CSS3 with full selectors support and many other features. The next version of our Core engine supports all of ACID3 for example (including web fonts, HSLA/RGBA etc.). No, instead of developing new ways to write markup, they need to get into agreement (finally) of what the standards are truly going to be. I for one am tired of writing up code for different browser's and having to hack code around to make things work. What we need to be doing is pushing the vendor's into getting it right. James Jeffery wrote: Never really heard of ARIA until I came across it in a Web Development magazine (.net mag). I have just spent a few hours getting my head around it, and whilst I agree it looks useful for screen readers and such, isn't it less semantic? Applying attributes that would currently make your markup invalid is something which I am not happy about. Along with that, using to create a checkbox seems less semantic than using form elements. Is ARIA markup only supposed to be used with browsers who have JS enabled or sites that use alot of JS for dynamic content? What about browsers that don't support ARIA markup? I'm only dipping my feet in the water at the moment so I probably don't fully understand, but from what I have read so far it seems a bit wishy washy at the moment. Any replies appreciated. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** David Storey Chief Web Opener, Product Manager Opera Dragonfly, Consumer Product Manager Opera Core, Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group member Consumer Product Management & Developer Relations Opera Software ASA Oslo, Norway Mobile: +47 94 22 02 32 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://my.opera.com/dstorey *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] ARIA
It would be really nice, that instead of introducing more and more design element features like ARIA markup, that what is and isn't supported at different levels (HTML4 or HTML5 or XHTML), that w3c and the browser vendor's worked together to properly come to agreement on what should be used rather then what they want to make as they're own spin off. I mean, look at what IE does to CSS, and then Opera uses the standards differently although much better. At least, as far as I can tell Mozilla are the only ones to get it completely right, but then even it has it's own quirks. No, instead of developing new ways to write markup, they need to get into agreement (finally) of what the standards are truly going to be. I for one am tired of writing up code for different browser's and having to hack code around to make things work. What we need to be doing is pushing the vendor's into getting it right. James Jeffery wrote: Never really heard of ARIA until I came across it in a Web Development magazine (.net mag). I have just spent a few hours getting my head around it, and whilst I agree it looks useful for screen readers and such, isn't it less semantic? Applying attributes that would currently make your markup invalid is something which I am not happy about. Along with that, using to create a checkbox seems less semantic than using form elements. Is ARIA markup only supposed to be used with browsers who have JS enabled or sites that use alot of JS for dynamic content? What about browsers that don't support ARIA markup? I'm only dipping my feet in the water at the moment so I probably don't fully understand, but from what I have read so far it seems a bit wishy washy at the moment. Any replies appreciated. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Re: ARIA
On 11 Aug 2008, at 20:30, Rob Crowther wrote: David Storey wrote: thing it adds is giving you more brownie points for validating, while not allowing WAI-ARIA to work if JavaScript is turned off. I would have thought that, if JavaScript was turned off, the ARIA stuff wouldn't be too useful. As its purpose is to communicate dynamic changes performed with JS to assistive technologies? If JS is turned off then there's no in page updates and regular WCAG applies? Does ARIA have benefits even to 'static' HTML apps? It can do. For example, authors often create controls using bits or mark up like spans and divs. While it is best to use the correct HTML element, ARIA can tell the screen reader what you mean the mark-u to be. Google uses divs instead of buttons quite often for example (probably for styling reasons). While that is a bit more contrived there are controls, such as trees or sliders where there are no correct html element to use. Mostly JavaScript would be used, but it is possible with just server side code if needed. Rob *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** David Storey Chief Web Opener, Product Manager Opera Dragonfly, Consumer Product Manager Opera Core, Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group member Consumer Product Management & Developer Relations Opera Software ASA Oslo, Norway Mobile: +47 94 22 02 32 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blog: http://my.opera.com/dstorey *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
