RE: [SPAM] Re: [WSG] selling web standards
Hi all, Probably; the first solution won't work for ASP.NET developers. They would say we also seperate design and content by using our IDE(i.e. MS Visual .NET). I still cannot sell web standarts to my company by using this argument... Regards, Tolga MIRMIRIK http://mirmirik.net/ Original Message Subject: [SPAM] Re: [WSG] selling web standards From: Joseph R. B. Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, June 08, 2006 8:56 pm To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org I would say the safest arguments would be: 1. Separation of design and content - programmers can't deny the value of normalization which is the result, plus the ease of design changes on your end looking forward. 2. The other is accessibility / mobile devices. If you can state a case that mobile and other devices will interact with their stuff, well... My 2 cents, Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com (609)335-3076 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pat Ramsey wrote: Jan, Outstanding site! That's going to be very helpful to me. Cheers! Patrick -- Pat Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.southwestern.edu/~ramseyp ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [SPAM] Re: [WSG] selling web standards
Unfortunately, seperatation of code and content, accessibility and mobile devices are concepts generally too removed from the people who buy websites. :) There are, however, things on their minds that standards can improve, which do matter to them ... 1. Standards-based sites can make use of semantic code, thus search engines can interpret pages more accurately, and that is a true (and cheap) form of *search engine optimisation*; a task any client opens their wallet to. 2. Semantic code, especially when the developers adopt a consistent coding style, makes the code within pages more consisent both within projects, and from project to project. If you strive to use the XHTML 1.1 set of elements, you will find yourself more likely to use consistent set of elements and attributes, although there is much more work than just that. (Read up on what Doug Bowman talked about at Webstock). This makes them more rapid to create, and to return to when you need to make changes. This reduces time, and thus costs. You may wish to pivot this idea in that it means it is more rapid to do work, therefore you can do more for a given budget. Its a friday night so I'll leave it at that :P Sig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, Probably; the first solution won't work for ASP.NET developers. They would say "we also seperate design and content by using our IDE(i.e. MS Visual .NET)". I still cannot sell web standarts to my company by using this argument... Regards, Tolga MIRMIRIK http://mirmirik.net/ --- Sigurd Magnusson | Technical Director SilverStripe Level 3, Symes De Silva House97-99 Courtenay Place Wellington, New Zealand Phone +64 4 978 7330 Fax +64 4 978 7349 Mobile +64 21 421 208 SilverStripe Website Management SilverStripe gives you full control of your website. From adding and modifying pages on your website, to sending personalised email newsletters to thousands of people, everything can be done quickly and easily by people without technical knowledge of the Internet. Find out more Website Owners Web Designers - Original Message Subject: [SPAM] Re: [WSG] selling web standards From: "Joseph R. B. Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, June 08, 2006 8:56 pm To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org I would say the safest arguments would be: 1. Separation of design and content - programmers can't deny the value of normalization which is the result, plus the ease of design changes on your end looking forward. 2. The other is accessibility / mobile devices. If you can state a case that mobile and other devices will interact with their stuff, well... My 2 cents, Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com (609)335-3076 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pat Ramsey wrote: Jan, Outstanding site! That's going to be very helpful to me. Cheers! Patrick -- Pat Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.southwestern.edu/~ramseyp ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** **The discu
Re: [WSG] selling web standards
Have you thought of going down the list of proven benefits? Bandwidth savings, faster page load times, search engine optimization, less time spent in page maintenance, etc.? I agree, getting the discussion started the right way is key. I'm doing the same thing with my employer - trying to inject standards into our pages. Cheers!PatrickOn 6/8/06, Dan Treuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I need to do now is make it absolutely clear to them that their table-ridden, presentational markup is not welcome on our project without bruising any egos. My fear is that this firm falls into Emil Stenström's Level 2 of CSS experience (They believe it's far too hard and ill-supported to use instead of tables.) or even Roger Johansson's Level 2 of HTML experience (They think HTML is too simple for them to bother with and that their IDE should be smart enough to handle it all for them.). My questions to the group are these: (1) Could they argue that their development environment ( ASP.Net) doesn't allow them to produce standards-compliant markup and CSS and if they attempt to do that, what should I reply with? (note: I don't have any practical experience with ASP.Net, but I do w/ classic ASP and PHP) (2) What should my primary points be when emphasizing to them the need for this site to be standards-compliant? -- Pat Ramsey[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.southwestern.edu/~ramseyp **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
Re: [WSG] selling web standards
Dan Treuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] What should my primary points be when emphasizing to them the need for this site to be standards-compliant? [...] --- Hello Dan, Thought this is not directly related, it is closely so, thus this article may still provide you with some needed ammo. http://accessites.org/gbcms_xml/news_page.php?id=15 HTH Sincerely, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ http://accessites.org/ http://graybit.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] selling web standards
Outstanding site! That's going to be very helpful to me. MACCAWS is actually not maintained any longer, lack of time I'd say, but I hope we'll continue with the spreading of this message worldwide in WaSP ILG as we have Stef Troeth (of the MACCAWS team) on board. -- Jan Brasna :: www.alphanumeric.cz | www.janbrasna.com | www.wdnews.net ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] selling web standards
I would say the safest arguments would be: 1. Separation of design and content - programmers can't deny the value of normalization which is the result, plus the ease of design changes on your end looking forward. 2. The other is accessibility / mobile devices. If you can state a case that mobile and other devices will interact with their stuff, well... My 2 cents, Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com (609)335-3076 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pat Ramsey wrote: Jan, Outstanding site! That's going to be very helpful to me. Cheers! Patrick -- Pat Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.southwestern.edu/~ramseyp ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/358 - Release Date: 6/7/2006 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: Re: [WSG] selling web standards
Thanks to Jan and everyone who replied. Great resources and advice.Dan Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 19:47:07 +0200 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] selling web standards Outstandingsite!That'sgoingtobeveryhelpfultome. MACCAWSisactuallynotmaintainedanylonger,lackoftimeI'dsay,but Ihopewe'llcontinuewiththespreadingofthismessageworldwidein WaSPILGaswehaveStefTroeth(oftheMACCAWSteam)onboard. -- JanBrasna::www.alphanumeric.cz|www.janbrasna.com|www.wdnews.net ** Thediscussionlistforhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ Seehttp://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm forsomehintsonpostingtothelistgettinghelp ** **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
Re: [WSG] selling web standards
Jan Brasna wrote: Outstanding site! That's going to be very helpful to me. MACCAWS is actually not maintained any longer, lack of time I'd say, but I hope we'll continue with the spreading of this message worldwide in WaSP ILG as we have Stef Troeth (of the MACCAWS team) on board. I think those of us that saw the need for MACCAWS found ourselves with plenty of work... I'd still like to do a MACCAWS for Accessibility, but it needs a host of willing volunteers... ;) -- Join me: http://wiki.workalone.co.uk/ Thank me: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/registry/1VK42TQL7VD2F Engage me: http://www.boldfish.co.uk/portfolio/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] selling web standards
BTW on the topic of standards thru ASP.NET, this might be helpful as well: http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/reference/design/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnaspp/html/aspnetusstan.asp http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200511/no_xhtml_10_strict_in_aspnet_20/ http://aspnetresources.com/blog/aspnet_for_designers.aspx http://aspnetresources.com/blog/aspnet_and_xhtml.aspx http://www.aspnetresources.com/blog/xhtml10_transitional_in_aspnet20.aspx http://www.aspnetresources.com/articles/HttpFilters.aspx http://www.riderdesign.com/products/ http://aspnet.4guysfromrolla.com/articles/050504-1.aspx -- Jan Brasna :: www.alphanumeric.cz | www.janbrasna.com | www.wdnews.net ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] selling web standards
Hi Dan, My questions to the group are these: (1) Could they argue that their development environment (ASP.Net) doesn't allow them to produce standards-compliant markup and CSS and if they attempt to do that, what should I reply with? (note: I don't have any practical experience with ASP.Net, but I do w/ classic ASP and PHP) It will take them more work to make it standards compliant, but actually .net 2.0 can work really well with standards. If constructed correctly then it is really good for separating content, design and functionality and most developers love that because it makes their environment more structured and means they dont have to bother with any html or anything. Try and build up a really good relationship with the developers, and then perhaps change things little by little? Most of it depends on how they are using the .net and how they have structured their environment. The websites Jan listed are all _really_ good for the developers to read. Hope it all goes well, feel free to contact me off-list if you have any issues. We work with standard .net pretty much every day, so I may be able to help you out. Rachel From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:listdad@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of Dan Treuter Sent: Friday, 9 June 2006 3:44 a.m. To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] selling web standards Hi Friends, I find myself in an interesting position. I've recently started a new job as Web Multimedia Manager for a medium sized company. Prior to my start, the company contracted with a Web firm to recreate their website from the ground up (i.e. new design, ASP.Net content management system, new hosting solutions, etc.). Our current site leaves much to be desired on any number of fronts including the design, markup, accessibility, etc. so I'm glad the company has committed to making this investment in the site. (By the way, I was brought in because it dawned on them that they actually need someone to be thinking about the web, e-mail marketing, etc. on a full-time basis rather than sporadically.) The firm they've hired seems completely competent in ASP.Net development and I have no worries about the application side of the project. In looking at several of the firm's previous sites however, it's evident that they're very entrenched in the embedded table world for layout. I know all the reasons for this being an antiquated approach to design and have been using CSS for layout for years (and no, not Dreamweaver-generated div-mania :D ). What I need to do now is make it absolutely clear to them that their table-ridden, presentational markup is not welcome on our project without bruising any egos. My fear is that this firm falls into Emil Stenström's Level 2 of CSS experience (They believe its far too hard and ill-supported to use instead of tables.) or even Roger Johansson's Level 2 of HTML experience (They think HTML is too simple for them to bother with and that their IDE should be smart enough to handle it all for them.). My questions to the group are these: (1) Could they argue that their development environment (ASP.Net) doesn't allow them to produce standards-compliant markup and CSS and if they attempt to do that, what should I reply with? (note: I don't have any practical experience with ASP.Net, but I do w/ classic ASP and PHP) (2) What should my primary points be when emphasizing to them the need for this site to be standards-compliant? I'd like to pull out the We're the client and you'll do what we ask for. card, but I don't want to get our relationship off to a bad start if I don't have to since I'll be working closely with them for the next several months. Any responses to the above questions or other advice you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Dan FYI... Emil Stenström's Levels of CSS Experience post http://friendlybit.com/css/levels-of-css-knowledge/ Roger Johansson's Levels of HTML Experience post http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200605/levels_of_html_knowledge/ **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help** **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
RE: [WSG] selling web standards
My questions to the group are these: (1) Could they argue that their development environment (ASP.Net) doesn't allow them to produce standards-compliant markup and CSS and if they attempt to do that, what should I reply with? (note: I don't have any practical experience with ASP.Net, but I do w/ classic ASP and PHP) It will take them more work to make it standards compliant, but actually .net 2.0 can work really well with standards. Agreed on that point, .NET 2.0 adds a lot more standards friendly features. Working with standards-compliant code in Visual Studio 2003 was/is a nightmare, as each time you switch between design and code views it reformats it back to HTML 4. My general rule for .NET development is DON'T use built in controls - I might lessen this with the introduction of v2.0, but it's a good guideline. I've build simple UL/OL list controls for example which allow developers to easily add LI items and ensure it's written correctly (valid) to the page. So build up a good custom-control library using good semantic HTML features and she'll be right. Cheers, Adam ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] selling web standards
Here's a friendly site to help make the case for standards... http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/everything.html .Matthew Cruickshank http://docvert.org MSWord to Open Standards ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
