Soma Buy - Online DrugStore

Cheap Reductil Online, There has been a debate circulating the internet for a while now about standard compliance and creativity. Reductil medicine, While standards compliance is a good thing, it alone cannot be used as a measure for success, reductil bromocriptine. Reductil pills sold in london pharmacy, While it is a large determinant of the quality of a site’s construction, it has almost nothing to do with the effectiveness of a design, information on reductil. Reductil prices brisbane, For example there are a number of websites that do validate and are utterly horrible, and on the other side of the spectrum there are insanely effectively designed sites that have hundreds of errors, reductil slimming pills available in us. Reductil cheapest price 15mg, Why is this. The short answer is that it is much easier to tout the effectiveness of something measurable such as validation, where effective design is not, Cheap Reductil Online.

Standards compliance has become a diversionary tactic

Design is hard to sell, circumvallate papillae reductil, Reductil for weightloss, and effective design is even harder to show because it looks effortless. Lucky for web designers, purchase reductil on line, Reductil 15 mg eating plan, there is a little program you can drop a URL in and it will shoot back a message saying all is well. This is why we see so many designers showing off their little badges in footers because talking about what makes their design effective is a much harder thing to do, where to bye reductil. Reductil slimming pills, Many designers have a hard time talking about their work and what makes it successful, so being able to hide behind “validation” means less uncomfortable discussions about design decisions, meridia reductil. Cheap Reductil Online, Compliance should not be the determining factor for a successful website design, rather a factor necessary to produce quality product. Reductil pills uk store, If you don’t agree, just think back for one moment to our recent “web 2.0 aesthetic” trend, can expect loss reductil weight, Reductil deaths, and whether it was based on creativity…

Compliance has led to complacency

Designers and developers have just latched on to the idea that being compliant really matters, and the truth is it isn’t (at least not from a branding perspective), reductil eyes. Duromine tenuate reductil differences, Anyone can make a site compliant, but far fewer people can actually produce a site that is visually interesting, buy reductil uk, Reductil slimming tablets, meets the client’s needs, and communicates their message effectively, reductil order. Cheap reductil, Because of this the internet is full of websites that really do look exactly like each other. Instead of pushing visual boundaries, afslanken reductil forum, Buy reductil, designers have settled for producing sites that play it safe and are easier to develop (I'm just as guilty at times too).

Because of this I have almost completely stopped looking at the so called inspiration sites, except for the FWA and other non CSS galleries, Cheap Reductil Online. While flash may not be appropriate for most websites, the creativity present within these sites is for the most part better than those in CSS galleries. Flash is a much more visual production method that is not as affected by its underlying structure. There is a possibility that this is why we see a lot more effective design solutions in these sites.

I’m not saying that producing a compliant site isn’t an important part of delivering a quality end product however more important details should be taken into consideration first. Not only that, but clients really don’t care because most don’t know what it means anyways. Either way I will be avoiding “standards complacency” by considering standards a production factor, not a determinant of effective design. Effective web design is about much much more.

09/22

ADD A COMMENT

15 Comments

Share This Page: Tweet this // Stumble It! // Del.icio.us // Float It! // Digg It! // Reddit

15 Responses to “Cheap Reductil Online”

Jin
September 22nd, 2008 at 9:39 pm

Agreed. To add further, a lot sites I’ve seen associate with the validation icon as a sign of “my site is accessible” as well, or even “usable.”

Aesthetics, accessibility, usability, good coding are independent factors of a successful web design. A truly successfully site encompasses all of these factors, not substitute one for the other.

As for the flash comment, I think you see more creativity in flash sites, simply because flash isn’t as easily copied. And I think it’s a good thing.
Jim
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:41 pm

I totally agree with you. I think its more important to be cutting edge than to be completely compliant. Compliant doesn’t in anyway mean good. It’s not our fault that developers can’t create a browser that works well, and 90% of internet users have no idea what they are doing and are still on IE 6.
Rob
September 23rd, 2008 at 4:57 am

Being compliant has nothing to do with Web Design.

Being compliant has to do with “correct” coding and is a technical measurement.

Web Design has to do with what something looks like and how it behaves.

They should be completely separated and independant from each other.

Rob’s latest post: Wanna tip?
Conrad Gorny
September 23rd, 2008 at 5:16 am

Ye i think your totally right.

Conrad Gorny
Freelance Graphic Designer
http://www.conradgorny.com
Boris
September 23rd, 2008 at 8:01 am

I agree with Rob on this one. While your post makes a valid points, in reality standards compliance and visual design are two separate aspects of the web site. Compliant for the most part is focused on technical part and does not feature much of the visual representation. Making sure that the web site you are making works in all the browser is not a choice its a must. Client does not care about designer’s personal convictions and if they want site for any possible user then it must be delivered. Sites should never sacrifice the visual aspect to complaints because there is no need for it.
benjamin
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:05 am

You make a god point. I certainly went through the “everything must validate” phase. I must admit that I am still in it. Yet I have never put validation ahead of design. If anything, I enjoy the challenge of finding a way to make everything validate. Now there are some cases where it would be totally unreasonable to do this. And for those projects, that’s just how it’s gonna be. But I have to say that the validation movement has done a lot for cleaning up the html crap hole that the web has been. There is still a lot of crap out there, and IE still loves to run this crap, but at least clean code is winning the battle over crap code these days. Overall, I do think that good design will always win over good code, based on the clients perspective. Sometimes, progress can only come from breaking the rules. And once we learn how to follow standards, we should push them to their limits and beyond.
Zinni
September 23rd, 2008 at 9:29 am

Rob & Boris,

We are on the same page. When I was writing this article, I was actually thinking about how I receive comments on my sources of inspiration series about how a site is not good because it fails a validation check. I was just trying to put into perspective how flawed of an argument this is.

Thank you everyone for your comments, I am actually surprised that the response has been so positive so far. I was expecting a couple of flames for this one…
Bunny got Blog
September 23rd, 2008 at 10:28 am

Oh I get it-
you argue and don’t negotiate

Bunny got Blog’s latest post: Sarah Palin & Hillary on Saturday Night Live
’Mas
September 23rd, 2008 at 2:03 pm

While I agree that standards compliance is not the only criteria for judging a site’s “worthiness”, let’s not throw out the baby with the bath water either. For the past couple of years now, I make every effort to produce code that validates while faithfully rendering my partner’s designs. The validation is there to help me make sure my t’s are crossed and my i’s dotted and nothing more.

Standards is more than validating the code. As you’ve aptly stated, validating code can be a hideous thing to view. Standards compliance is also about separating the content from the style and behavior so that each element operates in the proper context. That can be difficult to accomplish and is what sets the better designers apart from the uncouth.

That’s my 2 cents :^{>
Magenta
September 24th, 2008 at 8:51 am

…so is a creative Flash based site that cant get indexed by Search Engines still effective?
Nathan Beck
September 24th, 2008 at 9:56 am

Nice article. Holds true, and no - clients really don’t care about whether their site is valid or not - they just want to see return on investment.

Q. So - to keep everyone happy, why not build visually effective, usable, accessible, valid websites? \
A. Because it requires skill, and years of learning and practice to get to a level where you can tick all the boxes, and in turn charge a lot more for your time.

Nathan Beck’s latest post: Guest Post - Creating Usable Website Navigation
Jack McDaniel
September 25th, 2008 at 12:10 am

The industry you’re working within makes such a big difference in determining how creative you can get. It is important to expand the boundaries, but it has to make sense for the audience you are addressing. Construction companies (and their targeted audience) just can’t use the same level of creativity as a rock band.

As for valid, standards based approach - I don’t see how they should interfere with the creative aspects. Either you take care and code well, or you don’t.

Jack McDaniel’s latest post: ZAP Construction Corporate Identity
mark
September 25th, 2008 at 8:24 am

apologies: i basically copied the review I posted after i read it on cssdrive.com
I saw where the article had gotten many “thumbs down” ratings and decided to read it for myself!

…”Burn After Reading” an almost hit movie staring George Clooney and others comes to mind….

“Avoiding Standards Complacency

Standards compliance has led to complacency and become a diversion tactic. Anthony Zinni explains.”

Hmmm..provocative title and article! Serious food for thought here! - So why so many negatives? More “haters” as Sarah Palin would say?

Alas, the three or so paragraphs of the article are nothing much more than unsubstantiated blathering mis-opinion.

He makes a series of bold statements with no factual or even anecdotal backing nor examples.
“Standards compliance has become a diversion tactic

Design is hard to sell, and effective design is even harder to show because it looks effortless”

Of course he means (or should mean) “Standards Compliance has become a DIVERSIONARY tactic” grammar aside, why do you say that, exactly? We’ll never know, as he happily moves on to his next non-fact.

p.s. “This is why we see so many designers showing off their little badges in footers because talking about what makes their design effective is a much harder thing to do”

How about “talking about what makes their design effective” is NOT THEIR FCKING JOB???

lol
Zinni
September 25th, 2008 at 9:04 am

@mark,

I didn’t submit the article to that site. The grammatical errors are not my own.

The only response I have to your response is that if you think talking about what makes your design effective is not a designers job, then you are in for a world of disappointment. Every time a designer shows a client a concept, it should be backed by reason and purpose. Maintaining client expectations is integral to being a designer, it is all part of the process.
phillip
September 25th, 2008 at 10:12 am

“Standards compliance has become a diversion tactic”
Thats your first header I believe. Yeah, it should be “diversionary tactic” but big deal.

The little badges and icons indicating compliance with some standard or other are litting things they put on the site (note I didnt say THEIR site, since often when people do a site, it is not THEIRS but rather the site of GM or Walmart or some other big company, so they dont often have space or scope to go into what they want to say. Personally, unless you are doing your own personal site or doing something PRO-BONO (i.e. for a Charity or community group) or PRO-BONER (i.e. for a hot chick) you dont really have much scope or control anyway, and are often limited by the contextual framework you are in. Often times you are forced to work with fools (or, more diplomatically, people who do not share your design aesthetic )

What I do is work from a template initially (which is generally semantic and layout friendly) and a basic coding style which is implicitly starting out as tending more to being valid, I use degradable Javascript then add non-essential navigational flair and lookups afterwards.

I NEVER present validation to a client as part of my design/concept presentation - they would be pissed as hell to find that such nebulous niceties were part of the $150/hr they were paying for!
I make sure I do it behind the scenes for my own self-satisfaction, and also for when I get the call to make the site more ammenable to e-shoppers using an Iphone, it’s easy for me!