Hi Mike This is great to hear... Sounds like another convert to web standards! :) Russ
> > This list has made a fundamental change to the way I go about creating sites > in my shop. > > Previously, I usually worked on the data structure first after getting > agreement on the plan from the client, then got the client entering the data > while I got on with doing the front end and display stuff. > > The public/display parts of the site would take me much longer than building > the backend in most cases, and I had no real plan for how to attack the > task. Sometimes I'd try stuff and mess about with it for a day or more > while I tried to find a page layout that I liked. > > After learning more about the structured approach demanded by standards > compliance I built a site and was most impressed with how much it reduced my > building time and simplified the tweaks and changes requested by the client. > > > So now I'm in the process of making a series of template sites to use for > future sites. A fixed width two column site (based on the way Aura is built > - what a superb tool that is!!), a fluid 3 column site with headers and > footers, a fluid 2 column site with headers and footers, etc. > > For new sites, I reckon I can have the public areas done very fast now, and > be working on the more tricky things that the clients need. Thanks to this > list, I have a much better understanding of standards and compliance, and > can see the very real benefits of using the techniques discussed here. > (Although I have to add I don't consider myself anything more than a novice > in this field!! I know there's a lot more to learn). > > I can see benefits for me in a number of areas: > > Time to develop a site: It'll be much faster because I have the structural > elements pre-defined in my template sites. And since I built them, I know > what to tinker with to make the changes required by the client. > > Profit on a site: Because it'll take less time to develop, that means I can > either afford to charge less for the site, or just take more profit for > myself > > Ease of maintenance: Because the site is simpler in terms of the code, it's > obvious to me that it's going to be far easier to locate bits of code that > require fixing than wading through nested tables looking for the correct > cell. > > Profit on maintenance: Easier maintenance translates to either lower pricing > for maintenance, or more profit for me on the existing prices. > > Reuse of code: A structured approach will mean it will be far easier to > build site elements in modules that can be reused from site to site, thus > reducing further the cost and time to develop a site. > > Reduced maintenance: Standard-compliant sites will need less maintenance, > because there will be far fewer calls with clients telling me things are > broken. > > > > I feel kind of stupid that I didn't latch onto this idea earlier. I'm > looking at my last month's work with one of those > <slap-forehead-and-shout-DOH!> moments, thinking how much easier it would > have been to create half the stuff I've done over the last few years if I'd > known then what I know now. (And had the browser environment of today as > well, but that's another story). > > Thanks everyone on this list! You've made 2004 look a lot rosier for me > than 2003 was. > > Cheers > Mike Kear > Windsor, NSW, Australia > AFP Webworks > http://afpwebworks.com > ***************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *****************************************************
