| 9:56 am on Sep 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
And welcome to webmasterworld.
| 10:23 am on Sep 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Since my website is new I currently don't have an valid statistics related to visitors yet. My counter records my visits to my site so I'm sure the majority of the Netscape 4.0 visits are me!
| 10:44 am on Sep 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
About the other issues you raise:
The thin white border is another NN4 "feature". Even using the non-standard body tags [leftmargin=0 topmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0] doesn't eliminate the slivver of the browser's default background color.
In fact, I may go off on a minor rant, here. Those danged DHTML hidden/visible navigation divs are all the rage lately and I despise them. They are LAZY navigation structures, IMO, and they confuse people with:
1) too many options at once
2) the inability to compare those options, side by side.
Good information architecture with solid planning for navigation elements can create a much more universal menu structure -- one that serves more browsers well, and in a more comfortable fashion for the average user.
[Sorry if I tread on some toes there. Of course, there can be situations and applications where those dynamic menus make some sense and are well done. But they're not the rule in what I see today. It's a just a fad right now, like the blog look.]
| 3:08 pm on Sep 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Hello and thanks for the responses!
| 3:59 pm on Sep 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I'd just check the page in NN4 without the css and see if it's intelligible even though ugly. Let it go at that.
| 4:55 pm on Sep 20, 2002 (gmt 0)|
The only downside to this approach other than noted above is that the pages will not always have titles that make sense. Since my business name is part of my background graphic the visitor will be missing this. Repeating it in the body would look silly to the CSS user. I'll try doing a spacer gif with an alt tag of the company name.
Again, thanks for your suggestions. I actually understand what you are talking about so this HTML stuff must be growing on me!
| 6:07 am on Sep 21, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I wanted to followup and let everyone know that I have updated my pages per your suggestions. My Java Menu Applet is history and I have updated my pages so that they are presentable in Netscape 4 without Java enabled. They do look pretty bad without the nice graphics in the background! The important thing is that the content is intact and the menu is viewable and functional.
All of my pages still validate for 4.01 and the CSS validate as well. Currently I have tested the pages on Netscape 4, Netscape 7 and IE 5.5 and 6.0. Are there any other browsers that you would recommend I test?
Does anyone know of any Hit counters that validate?
My next steps will be to find and install a store component and search feature. I hope I can accomplish these things without having everything fall apart!
| 12:37 pm on Sep 21, 2002 (gmt 0)|
I'd also test in Mozilla 1.0 and Opera. I don't know how similar Mozilla is to NN7 but there may be some differences.
Opera is a must because it correctly reads CSS. It can show you errors that might otherwise work in IE etc. Opera (ver. 6 atleast) also makes validation checks simple, just press "Ctrl", "Alt" and "v" at the same time.
| 7:44 pm on Sep 21, 2002 (gmt 0)|
Assuming you've been using Windows, I encourage you to find a friend with a Mac to view your pages. Most of my sites run around 8% Mac users (compared to 2% Opera, for instance) and the OS can make a lot of difference in how the pages look.