6 Replies Latest reply: Jul 19, 2012 3:52 AM by osgood_ RSS

    How is this site built??

    osgood_ MVP

      I've seen a couple of sites built like the one below recently but can't quite work out what's happening. It appears as though all the pages are big swf files, or a number of files combined into one, right? But it also has a text alternative if you look at the code, right?

       

       

      http://www.johnmartincoachholidaysbath.co.uk

       

       

      Whats the downside to building a page like this because I have to say its quite punchy, more like a desk top publishing approach. I guess one draw back would be it wouldn't work on the ipad/iphone maybe and the text can't be enlarge in the browser.

       

      I'm trying to build a case against it because I have a potential client that likes it!!!!

       

      Thanks

       

      Os

       

      PS   What server is this: nginx/1.2.0

        • 1. Re: How is this site built??
          cdeatherage Community Member

          The most I can help you at the moment is to provide this link I found about nginx:

           

          http://www.aosabook.org/en/nginx.html

           

          Chris

          • 2. Re: How is this site built??
            pziecina Community Member

            Hi Os

             

            If you look at this attribute in the doctype, (xmlns:fb="http://ogp.me/ns/fb#") and follow the link ,you will see that it is to a custom Schema, (who said xhtml is not extensible) and many of the other links are also to external custom stylesheets/javascript/etc that are related to the custom Schema usage.

             

            I cannot be 100% certain but it looks like the site was a generated conversion of a flash site, similar to using the new feature in flash cs6 to export the site as html5/javascript. There are also a number of 3rd party plug-ins that will do this to swf files, (from flash).

             

            The arguments against this type of site are -

            • The same can be done using html5/css3, and would be usable on all mobile devices.
            • The site is not accessible
            • Uses excessive inline spans for styling

            As a final 'don't do' it displays the 'use of cookies' info in a position and style that gives a very bad impression to the user, (see image below).

             

            Capture.PNG

            PZ

            • 3. Re: How is this site built??
              Ben Pleysier MVP

              pziecina wrote:

               

              who said xhtml is not extensible

               

              GUILTY! 

               

              Gramps

              • 4. Re: How is this site built??
                osgood_ MVP

                Thanks people for the replies.

                 

                So are we saying this may have existed originally has a flash site and was exported to the state it is now? If so why would they bother to do that because in it's present form it's no better than flash is it?

                 

                You say the site is not assessible but to a screen reader it will be, right, as it has all the base html in the page as well.

                 

                You cant do exactly the same with html5/css3 because the page in question is 'locked' down i.e., it acts more like a dtp page rather than a webpage and unless one is specifically designing with mobile in mind I can't see html5./css3 has any advantages.

                • 5. Re: How is this site built??
                  pziecina Community Member

                  osgood_ wrote:

                   

                  So are we saying this may have existed originally has a flash site and was exported to the state it is now? If so why would they bother to do that because in it's present form it's no better than flash is it?

                   

                  Hi Os

                   

                  Yes.

                  The main reason for doing so is that the site is now viewable on an iPhone/Pod/Pad. Note the use of  'viewable'. This is because even though the site can be seen, actually navigating the site is virtually impossible.

                   

                  You say the site is not assessible but to a screen reader it will be, right, as it has all the base html in the page as well.

                  The html is there, but it is not selectable. Try selecting the text and one finds that only certain portions are selectable. When testing on a screen reader such as Jaws, even though html code is translated to the reader when it is not selectable the reader often ignores what is translated. This is a little like using the css hack of placing the text off the screen with -9999px, (does not work by the way) rule in that the reader does not know if it should display the text or not.

                   


                  You cant do exactly the same with html5/css3 because the page in question is 'locked' down i.e., it acts more like a dtp page rather than a webpage and unless one is specifically designing with mobile in mind I can't see html5./css3 has any advantages.

                  You will have to explain what you mean by, "locked down". But the layout is reproducible in html/css(3), (exactly as in the link, and one can also do this in IE5+ if one wishes) so I can see no advantages of using this type of technique.

                   

                  PZ

                  • 6. Re: How is this site built??
                    osgood_ MVP

                    pziecina wrote

                     

                    You will have to explain what you mean by, "locked down". But the layout is reproducible in html/css(3), (exactly as in the link, and one can also do this in IE5+ if one wishes) so I can see no advantages of using this type of technique.

                     

                    PZ

                     

                    By 'locked down' I mean the pages are not flexible...the type doesnt expand. If you try and do the same in html5/css3 the design of the site won't work because it follows a very rigid dtp approach. Any expanding of the text will throw the design out. I suspect as you are saying it was originally produced in Flash and somehow 'crudely' converted for some reason. Possibly as you mentioned to be viewed on the Apple idevices.

                     

                    I see no advantages of using this technique other than is keeps the page in the exact format how it was designed.

                     

                    I was just wondering how it was built because I could not select and download any image like normal yet all the html code was there as normal and I could'nt locate a huge base swf file as I would have expected in the case of a Flash site. It seems its all broken up into small bits and some how reasembled on the fly.

                     

                    Thanks for your input.