This week’s reading were both general (XHTML and CSS basics) and specific (how website appearance aids in functionality and establishing credibility).  I think I am going to like the Wyke-Smith book and working with CSS – I have a certain amount of programming experience but one thing that I haven’t figured out yet is how to get to the editing environment.  When I was doing BASIC, FORTRAN and APL (yes, I am that old), I wrote code in the old DOS environment, the file extension would identify it as a program and the computer or compiler would recognize it and run it as such.  Where does one “go” to write XHTML?  I asked Josh this question last semester and didn’t have a chance to put his answer into practice.  There were certain parts of the answer i didn’t understand anyway.  Here is his answer:

Basically, HTML / CSS /  Javascript doesn’t require any compiling at all; the *browser*  handles the rendering when it’s fed the raw code (usually downloaded via HTTP from a server). If you wanted, you could just click “save  as” to save the raw HTML of a page, put it up on your own server, and view it in a browser – the page is the code itself, nothing more. To  change the coding of a page (say, for example to add a heading  wrapped in <h1> tags), you’d just add the appropriate text to  the .html file.

I think I’m missing something – I don’t know what to save the raw code as, or how to put it on my own server.  But I guess knowing the question is halfway toward working out the answer.

I had some trouble with the link to Donald Norman’s article, so I Googled the whole title and found and article of his with the same name but at a different address.  It started with a comparison of 3 teapots.  I was interested in the premis, so I read on.  the conclusion I came to after skimming the article was not that attractive things work better, but that people work better with attractive – or otherwise appealling – things.  In the Fogg article, I found the conclusions about judging credibility based on a site’s visual design to be somewhat predictable.  The large sample in the Stanford survey should be expected to focus on the superficial aspects of a site, while the smaller, focused sample of the Sliced Bread Design study should be expected to rate content as more important.  The Stanford survey results are not as useful as they would be if they featured demographic data on the respondants.

Welcome Back, Blogger…

January 24, 2007

Well, it’s a new semester and a new class (HIST 697) so that means the old Clio blog gets brought out and dusted off.  This semester we get to track my progress in editing CSS and other such advanced techniques.  I decided to keep my blog in WordPress because I want to retain my earlier efforts, though my guess is that the Kam Zero website in the blogroll will probably change.  The current Verizon site doesn’t have much functionality.  Stay tuned for more posts, and hopefully this class will be as enjoyable as the last one.

By the way, for no apparent reason the title of this blog has decided to center itself on the page rather than be left justified.  I don’t have any idea why this happened, but I noticed it after I changed the text in the “about this site” paragraph to the left.  Gremlins…

 Now as you may have noticed the whole blog presentation has changed.  I gave up trying to get the title to align properly and switched presentations.  Change is good.