Another World-Advice

[kiloj757]

Hello All,

I hate to beat a dead horse but I could use some input.

I have been asked by some friends to help them build their website. Oh goody. :)

They are asking me to do something that is way beyond my experience. I need some experienced advice. I think.

My skills are in Photoshop, Fireworks, Dreamweaver, and ImageReady. They have plenty of server space. I have been researching some of the new CSS ZEN sites and new Flash based sites being made.

Is it possible to have a CSS based website that also shows Flash?
Is it worth building a site myself to start out?
What are the basics of having a website where the users can create their own profile's and upload videos and pictures, like MySpace?
Where do functionality and dependability meet with sites like these? I want it to be aesthetically pleasing as well as being as user friendly as possible while still maintaining an easy to update interface.
What are the most relevant classes to take in school to help my cause?
Are there any links you know of that discuss these issues further?

Any information will be helpful. I will be moving to San Diego in two weeks to begin work on this project.

[drhowarddrfine]

1) Yes
2) Sure
No time right now

[NogDog]

Some links for the "philosophical" questions:
http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/
http://www.alistapart.com/
http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/
http://www.w3.org/WAI/

[Stephen Philbin]

From what I've seen, formal education on the subject of "how to build websites", tends to teach how to make sites and pages the bad old way. You'd have a hell of a time convincing me to get a "qualification" in web development anyway.

[kiloj757]

From what I've seen, formal education on the subject of "how to build websites", tends to teach how to make sites and pages the bad old way. You'd have a hell of a time convincing me to get a "qualification" in web development anyway.

If I worked with a company like say, Z57, where they put together real estate sites, do you think that would teach me the "right" way?
Or has it been easier for you to learn from experimenting?

[Stephen Philbin]

Well I can't say I really know anything about Z57, so I wouldn't know. Every company is different and use whichever methodology they choose at the time. It's actually the methodology that's the main thing. The "code" you use to build your sites and pages remains largely the same. It's the methodology (and sometimes your opinion, situation and other constraints) that dictate how you use the code and put it together.

For example: (crackers and stupid/insecure browsers aside) there's no such thing as good or bad Javascript. Javascript is just Javascript. The only thing that can be called "good" or "bad" about Javascript is how it is used. Even then, it's totally down to opinion about whether the use was a good or a bad one.

The way I build my stuff is largely down to three factors:

1) My own opinion on what is right and wrong.
2) My sources of learning material
3) Being an active member of these forums.

and in my case, each pretty much reinforced the others. For the most part, they all led me in the same direction. I've built virtually nothing for about 7 months now, but when I do make stuff I always develop with an emphasis on solid functionality and accessibility. Though I'm more of a moderate when it comes to accessibility. I consider people at the far reaches of both sides of the accessibility argument to be rather crazy, and likewise, they probably wouldn't think much of me either.

I learned as much from reading specifications, as I did from learning from my own mistakes and reading these forums and learning from other people's mistakes. For me, the specifications (despite being spirit-crushingly boring to read) were a massive help. Armed with the knowledge I gleaned from them I could experiment and create without getting stuck quite so much and I had a better understanding of the "why" as well as the "how" behind whatever I'd be doing. It also helps to give you a familiarity with terminology you're likely to encounter when trying to learn about other things in web development.

Especially in the case of the specifications that come out of the World Wide Web Consortium (http://www.w3.org), accessibility and what most active members of this forum would consider "good practice" are built in [Specifications from the W3C are called "Recommendations"]. Many other specifications will mention little or nothing about accessibility etc., but I often feel that "clean coding" is either implied or assumed.

[kiloj757]

and in my case, each pretty much reinforced the others. For the most part, they all led me in the same direction. I've built virtually nothing for about 7 months now, but when I do make stuff I always develop with an emphasis on solid functionality and accessibility. Though I'm more of a moderate when it comes to accessibility. I consider people at the far reaches of both sides of the accessibility argument to be rather crazy, and likewise, they probably wouldn't think much of me either.


This is exactly what I want to know. To my knowledge networking sites such as MySpace and Facebook are on the accessibility end of the spectrum. My efforts were to build something, where instead of having profiles formed in CSS pages or javascript, they could be formed into customizable flash pages. Do you know of any sites formed like this? (I don't)

With the specs, would you say look into program specs for html generating programs, or to look for general specs on the concepts like those from W3C's website, for the most useful info? As you said it's "soul crushing" reading! I just don't want to spend hours reading through something out of date. What should I look to gain most from reading specs? I realize you said, good practice, but is that really what people are most concerned with nowadays?
Also, am I allowed to review tech reports on the recommendation track?
I always seem to bite off more than I can chew. Thanks