I'm glad i re-checked my email before sending.
I would like to echo the sentiments already mentioned - the layout needs work.
Whether your form is in a table, or just maintains this tabular appearance, it is clear that context is a very important part of this form - you have 16 pairs of identical fields whose only meaning comes from their context in the form.
At the moment, the 2x2 layout of each section seems to confuse things a little - it took me a little while to glean that this part of the layout had no real importance.
As the others have mentioned, I would suggest going for a 1x4, or 4x1 layout.
Now, i've done a basic 'fieldset' layout, and that gives you pretty close to the general layout you want:
<fieldset>
<legend>SAEL</legend>
<label for=""><select name="saelDiscipline1" id="saelDiscipline1">
<option>discipline</option>
</select>
</label>
<label for=""><input name="saelSplit1" id="saelSplit1">
%</label>
<select name="saelDiscipline2" id="saelDiscipline2">
<option>discipline</option>
</select>
<input name="saelSplit2" id="saelSplit2">
<select name="saelDiscipline3" id="saelDiscipline3">
<option>discipline</option>
</select>
<input name="saelSplit3">
<select name="saelDiscipline4">
<option>discipline</option>
</select>
<input name="saelSplit4">
</fieldset>
....and so on. But this is no good for accessibly and semantics - you will have 4 fields, all labeled "1", and the only difference between them is the fieldset that they lie in. A more appropriate label would be "SAEL discipline 1", but that wouldn't look very good, would it?
Worse yet, you would have 16 text fields, all labeled "%".
So, the idea of context is quite important here, which is where, i believe, a table would come in handy.
It provides a better conceptual layout of your form - If i see i am in the row with a heading "SAEL", and the column with the heading "split", the purpose of the field in that particular cell is a lot clearer to me.
This would also fit nicely with peter's suggestion too, and make the layout a lot clearer.
one final layout concern - what value does the "(%)" add after the school name? There is already more than enough information that were dealing with percentage splits. I don't think it's necessary.
am i off topic yet? :o)
--adam--
On 10/21/05, Peter Ottery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Rachel,
before you dive into the markup (& i'm not sure if this is much help
to you) but if you can simplify the proposed visual design you may be
able to save yourself some pain in the css layout (cause agreed, it
would be fairly complex)
it took me a while to understand the form and what columns related to
what. i think it has some usability problems. are you able to lay it
out a bit simpler? something like this maybe?
http://skunkworks.farcrycms.com/pot/temp/complexform2.gif
going with something like that would require much fewer "hooks" to get
everything aligning right.
i realise this is off the topic of standards but it all fits in
together at some point
cheers,
pete :)
On 10/21/05, Rachel Radford wrote:
> I am completely stumped as to what the best way to attack the markup for
> this form:
> http://www.heliocell.com/complexform.gif
>
> It isn't a data table and yet there are headers there and it is in
> columns... so not sure if it warrants being in a table or if everything
> should be divs. But then also unsure how it would all fit together as a
> form.
>
> It is an internal application for a limited number of people, and
> accessibility therefore isn't a major concern - although obviously I would
> like to make it as accessible as possible in case there is need for it in
> the future.
>
> Anyone able to give me any advice on how to tackle this one?!
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
