HTML Forum

in the past 30minutes I have clicked 2 links labelled "Catalogue" and "Request a Catalogue" hoping to find information to do with catalogues, both times Outlook Express opens up. NOT what I wanted.

As for pricing, the reason most B2b sites do NOT give you a price :) > = > They like to know who/what they are quoting to:

A 1 man company will be quoted a LOT less, than IBM or Amazon would (thats the whole point of Enterprise solutions, make them PAY)

actually, NO.

they tend to be doing it on the Highest Bid Price (match d#@xx=).

I'm sure an older thread nudged my in the direction of px usage from now on. hmmmmm. Unless i don't fall in the "tiny font" category however small that is

Best read up on this stuff :)

>Overly literal search engines
Ah, so which search engine does he work for then ;)

That's an interesting point (if I understand what you are saying correctly)

I would never use a a regular search engine (like Google) for internal searching of my sites. I'd like to have more control, formatting, suggestions, etc. through a CGI. Is that your meaning? I guess it becomes a problem if your site is over a couple hundred pages? I need that problem to learn from :-)

I think this point could easily be expanded to include any link which points to anything other than a web page or section thereof, without making it explicitly clear that you'll be getting something else.

I cannot stand it when I click on a link and without warning find either my download manager or my acrobat reader launching.

When users click a link, they expect to be taken to a web page, or perhaps an anchor on the same page. If you are going to deliver anything else via a hot link... make it clear to the user.

I was meaning free search engine scripts are commonly used and maybe lack depth for a more "comprehensive search solution". The article quotes search engines as being too "literal", i.e. not taking off the page factors into account or weighting the different uses of the keyword on the page.

Most free scripts are fairly basic (in all due respect!), and don't take into account fancy things like PR and anchor text of inbound links.

Since these free SE scripts are pretty widespread, if they are "lacking" in any way, then 1000's of sites lack alongside.

Search engines are not exactly a 10 min job if you want a good one for your site. They need to be tailor made. Look at WW, there are tens of thousands of threads to be found, most of which can only be found through the site search.

Brett runs the board, not a search engine :)

>I cannot stand it when I click on a link and without warning find... acrobat reader launching.

..and my address bar, and my buttons bar, and my favorites bar, and my...

No kidding.

Agree - however I have seen some very effective uses of horizontal scrolling (e.g. "maps" and "cartography" related information).

Although I see the argument and point - in the context of viral marketing there are many ways to avoid this.

Click-Through Test (although I can't take credit for the chosen URL's) I have been relucant to fool with success.

157 characters - average daily click-throughs 900; maximum recorded daily - 2307

unrequested backlinks - 203 (although I only see a backlink if clickthrough occurs is many cases. Deeplinked PR6

*ttp://www.*************.***/interactive/earthquakes_seismic_waves_activity_earthquake_epicenter/earthquakes_seismic_waves_activity_earthquake_epicenter.html

115 characters - average daily click-throughs 1400; maximum recorded daily - 3773

unrequested backlinks - 243 Deeplinked PR6

*ttp://www.*************.***/interactive/weight_mass_volume_density_gravity/weight_mass_volume_density_gravity.html

Another example is amazon's outrageous URL's -- their visitation & sales are not hurting either.

Is it possible that some or a vast number of URL viewers look elsewhere for content because of the URL length... possible?

People though look for content, information, product/services, etc., I assume for the most part that URL length is not generally part of their "content check-list".

Would I ever recommend doing this: not a change! - just an illustration that what designers/marketers view as a "mistake" may not really apply to the target market. They don't have the same thought process.

1) It seems to me a good balance is struck when keeping
the framework of the site <fixed> meaning the Header, Nav
System, Footer and sometimes a few other structures.

2) Then allow for user defined size in the main content areas.

3) I would also use a "liquid" model so that as much
information is displayed on screen as possible at all
times for any monitor resolution.

(and a "liquid" page usually eliminates horz scrolling)

er... what I meant to say was NO ;)

CSS is a way of suggesting to the browser a way of displaying the page, not controlling it...

<body bgcolor="#ff0000" color="#00ff00">

and

body {
background-color: #f00;
color: #0f0;
}