I assume you're talking about Flash? If not, forget what follows...
Have you tried something like: on "Enter Frame", "GoToAndPlay [insert name of your marquee here]?".
Maybe it's plain nonsense, but it would also be helpful to have an example.
Or if you absolutetly want to, you google for 'marquee html tag', and you'll find the reference of the marquee 'tag' in less time than it took me to write that post.
Besides the fact that scrolling marquees are annoying, they are possibly the least useful way of conveying information.
When you have to communicate something in a limited amount of space, like news or stock prices on the outside of a building or headlines at the bottom of a TV screen (though I still find those distracting), a scrolling message may be necessary. However, on Web site, you have a whole computer screen to work with, which a user can scroll himself to read at his own pace.
With a scrolling marquee, the user is forced to read the information at a pace determined by something out of his control. Plus, if he starts reading in the middle of the message, he has to wait for it to come all the way back around again to get all the information.
To make things worse, people usually use the marquee tag to emphasize something important, yet doing so makes it even more difficult to get the information.
quote: Wes said:
Plus, if he starts reading in the middle of the message, he has to wait for it to come all the way back around again to get all the information.
They can click refresh to restart the marquee from the beginning. One can code the tag so it slows or stops on hover.
What i'm asking is, 'why is the <marquee> tag considered evil, dodgy or bad?' I'm asking about the tag itself, not whether one finds the resulting scrolling text aesthetically pleasing or not.
BTW, I do agree that scrolling text can be annoying most of the time, but this page... http://www.britsuperstore.com/ ... makes good use of the marquee tag (the one top left), there's another at the bottom of the page, and if one feels compelled to read that one.... seek prefessional help! :-)
quote:What i'm asking is, 'why is the <marquee> tag considered evil, dodgy or bad?' I'm asking about the tag itself, not whether one finds the resulting scrolling text aesthetically pleasing or not.
Exactly because of the things Wes stated.
The tag itself is long deprecated as far as I recall, and the result of its usage is a horrible thing.
Is that not enough?
As to refreshing the page - do you really want to tell your users to refresh the page to see a message Or have them sit and wait to read it Or even that they must hover their mouse over the text to actually read it
These are basically the '101' rules of web design: don't make your user wait or work to see your message!
As for the page you posted - I don't see anything that could possibly be considered 'good use' of the tag there (neither the top nor the bottom). In fact, it illustrates Wes' point quite well - there is more than enough space for the scrolling message to be displayed statically in the same spot. It is an abomination to have it scrolling instead...
~shrug~
if none of this is enough to convince you...I don't know what else to tell you...
correction: Marquee is not deprecated for the simple reason that is has never been in the HTML specification. Add to that the poor usability and you can really shoot the damn thing.
quote:I'm asking about the tag itself, not whether one finds the resulting scrolling text aesthetically pleasing or not.
What does that even mean? How can you separate the tag itself from what it does? HTML tags are not like friends who might be cool to hang around with in general but have these really annoying habits that get on your nerves from time to time. ("Yeah, marquee, he's not that bad a guy, but hang it all if he can't walk by a piece of text without making it scroll!") Their entire raison d'etre is their function. If the resulting scrolling text is evil (and I think we've established that), then the tag behind it is evil.
As Wes pointed out, the marquee is a technique used to convey information in a limited space. It would be like having really long columns of text on your web site--say, four columns--that ran down several screen lengths. Can you imagine how annoying it would be to have to scroll down and then scroll back up and then scroll back down, etc., just to read the text? What worked for newspapers does not work for the web (I'm not saying that you can't have columns, of course, but they have to be adapted to the web environment). In the same way, the marquee tag is an example of a technique that was the result of trying to apply non-web solutions to the web before everyone figured out that the web is an entirely different medium with different rules.
Does that make sense?
And for the record, the Brit Superstore page does not use the marquee tag. The effect is achieved with JavaScript. Not that that makes it any less of an abomination, of course, but I just thought I'd point it out. On the positive side, if you surf with JS off by default (like I do) you don't have to deal wtih scrolling text.
correction: Marquee is not deprecated for the simple reason that is has never been in the HTML specification. Add to that the poor usability and you can really shoot the damn thing.
thanks for the correction. I guess that makes it worse than I thought =)
And for the record, the Brit Superstore page does not use the marquee tag. The effect is achieved with JavaScript.
It is a marquee, hence this from the source code....
<marquee width="130" height="189" scrollamount="3" onMouseover="this.scrollAmount=1" onMouseout="this.scrollAmount=3" direction="up" class="brit-store-marquee">
the java is for the menu below the marquee.
i guess it's a down to what the client wants. Customer wanted a scrolling news thingy, customer gets a scrolling news thingy. And at the end of the day, the customer is always right even when they're wrong.
as long as the more common browsers (IE, FireFox, Navigator & Opera) support the tag I'll use it if the client wants it. (although opera displays the upwards marquee as static text & images, but not my problem anymore). Once the browsers stop supporting the tag, i will follow suit and stop using it.
I couldn't give a toss what tags w3c thinks we should and shouldn't use.
the marquee at the bottom is helping the britsuperstore site rank for allsorts of product searches it wasn't ranking for before hand. That text is not for the site visitors to read, it's for the search engines. Hence being stuck in a marquee tag rather than the big dull list of keywords plonked at the foot of his pages for all and sundry to be offended by.
I'm not against being pragmatic and cutting corners at times, but you know, when you make a website, as in write HTML + CSS pages, you'd rather go by the standards. Which standards emanate from the W3C. Right now computer says no : your site in not valid.
As for the SEO argument about the second marquee, have you ever heard about display:none; and semantic markup ?
Cut the crap a.k.a table based layout, font tags, marquee, multiple HEAD, BODY and HTML tags, document.write( navigationMarkup ), ... and your sites will be lighter, more accessible, work in more browsers and have better ranking in search engines.
It takes some time and efforts to switch from oldschool HTML to proper (X)HTML + CSS but it's really worth it. In the end you'll serve your customers better.
i guess it's a down to what the client wants. Customer wanted a scrolling news thingy, customer gets a scrolling news thingy. And at the end of the day, the customer is always right even when they're wrong.
That works great as a motivational poster in a grocery store break-room perhaps.
In the real world, it's a more complex matter, and 'what the cusstomer wants' in regard to web design is something that needs to be shaped, at least in part, by the web designer/developer.
The bottom line is that such a thing as this scrolling text is bad practice on pretty much every level. Clearly you are at liberty to use such things if you desire, but you must understand the negative effect such things will have as well. You may wish to do a search on something like "web design 101" for a ton of additional reference and study in regard to such things...
quote: hawkwind dave said:
the marquee at the bottom is helping the britsuperstore site rank for allsorts of product searches it wasn't ranking for before hand. That text is not for the site visitors to read, it's for the search engines. Hence being stuck in a marquee tag rather than the big dull list of keywords plonked at the foot of his pages for all and sundry to be offended by.
As you can clearly see, things like scolling text do a perfectly good job of offending 'all and sundry'
There are *far* more effective methods of improving a site's search rankings - again, a simple search for 'SEO' will return many a good article, study, and tutorial in this regard.
Do you seriously think it wise to distract visitors to a website with something as mundane as keywords, scrolling across the bottom of the page, diverting attention from the actual content?
quote: hawkwind dave said:
I couldn't give a toss what tags w3c thinks we should and shouldn't use.
You don't care what the body that governs the standards we code by has to say about the code....?
Don't know what to tell you then.....
It is a marquee, hence this from the source code....<marquee width="130" height="189" scrollamount="3" onMouseover="this.scrollAmount=1" onMouseout="this.scrollAmount=3" direction="up" class="brit-store-marquee">the java is for the menu below the marquee.
My bad. There is indeed a marquee tag in there. But apparently it's not a pure implementation, because it doesn't seem to run without javascript (not java, by the way... the two are very different things). Try viewing the page with javascript disabled to see what I mean.
You seem to have your mind made up on the matter, so I'm not going to attempt to persuade you differently. If you really don't care about standards, then you do what you have to do. You are indeed entitled to use the marquee tag if you so desire. Just don't expect people here to support your decision.
Hello and welcome. I'm not against being pragmatic and cutting corners at times, but you know, when you make a website, as in write HTML + CSS pages, you'd rather go by the standards. Which standards emanate from the W3C. Right now computer says no : your site in not valid.
Hello Poi,
Whilst I understand why w3c has created a set of standards for us all, a site which does not pass w3c validation does not mean that the site is bad in any way. I'm aware that it doesn't validate, but whilst it does not validate, it displays correctly in the browsers the vast majority of us use. So long as it displays correctly in IE & FF I'm happy.
BTW, I didn't build that website, i just mentioned it because i like the way the marquee has been used (the top one). The client wanted a 'news ticker' type thing, so i gave him one which he can easily edit. If he said "i want a news ticker" and I said "no you don't", he may have just gone to another company which would give him what he asked for. I could have talked him out of it in more constructive manner with regards to it being distracting, etc..., but personally, I don't think it's that bad, and the client is/was happy with it.
quote: DL-44 said:
'what the customer wants' in regard to web design is something that needs to be shaped, at least in part, by the web designer/developer.
I agree entirely.
quote: poi said:
As for the SEO argument about the second marquee, have you ever heard about display:none; and semantic markup ?
I don't want to use hidden text in any form, hence not using display:none; . I'm aware of semantic markup, but haven't really looked that deeply into it, I'll take your advice and read up on it.
I worked on that site a couple of years ago, the client was a sole trader and asked the company i worked for at the time to help him with his rankings. All i did was bang a marquee full of keywords at the foot of his pages and his orders went through the roof, so much so that he had to employ a full time member of staff to help him with the increase in orders. I'm not trying to blow my own trumpet here, just trying to explain why I'm defending the marquee tag in this thread. However, I don't use that particular method these days.
quote: poi said:
Cut the crap a.k.a table based layout, font tags, marquee, multiple HEAD, BODY and HTML tags, document.write( navigationMarkup ), ... and your sites will be lighter, more accessible, work in more browsers and have better ranking in search engines.It takes some time and efforts to switch from oldschool HTML to proper (X)HTML + CSS but it's really worth it. In the end you'll serve your customers better.
That site is an Actinic site (version 5 i seem to remember), the code is generated from god knows how many templates and the resulting generated code is rather dense (or, to be honest, a right bloody mess!). Not sure if the more recent versions of actinic generate a friendlier code as I've not worked with it for a good while now, but somehow i doubt it.
Like i say, i worked on the seo side of that site ages ago. When i build a website from scratch i do use CSS for all font styling and positioning. I've never liked farting around with tables and only use them if i need to display information in a table format. Although I am still a tad old school with my html. (which i guess is obvious to you all
quote: Suho1004 said:
My bad. There is indeed a marquee tag in there. But apparently it's not a pure implementation, because it doesn't seem to run without javascript (not java, by the way... the two are very different things). Try viewing the page with javascript disabled to see what I mean.
The contents of the marquee(s) are included from external files (which makes it easier for the client to edit), which could explain this. Although I'm not 100% sure, my knowledge of java/javascript leaves a lot to be desired.
I would like to say that I do respect and appreciate the knowledge, views and opinions of everybody here. I'm not here to argue or dissagree, I'm here to further my skills and to be an active member of this forum.
every now and then one see's comments in a thread which promts one to ask 'why?', which is the nature of forums, we're here to ask, discuss and stick our hoar in.
it's good to exchange views and opinions (even if you all think I'm nuts with my 'couldn't give a toss about w3c' comment) and look forward to doing so with you all in the foreseeable future.
I understand this is an older post back from 2006, and yes the good OLD marquee tag has been deprecated.. That's what got me to this page, because like hawkwind, The marquee does have usable uses and as of Jan 2009, it appears to work in all major browsers..
With that stated, I cant for the life of me see why this tag by some web designers is so hated.. Most of the nonsense arguments I have read here and at the W3c is still not a GOOD argument to hate such a tag unless you just clearly hate its original simplicity.. It does give you ample attributes to give the dam thing some controllable abilities!
Let's face it, the tag lived quite well before all the new dynamic web page changes come into effect to make browser more fit for the new age, but I have sparingly used marquees quite effective with my family website for scrolling member birthdays, and scrolling members who are online... So marquees does have a place for websites and design..
If you're marketing a web page, then maybe this want be the best idea of a tag for you, but to say it is a trash tag is nonsense.. That's a Personal Issue if you ask me.. And as hawkwind stated, just because is is denounced as deprecated doesn't make the tag the worst thing in life .. Let's face it, I can bet many of you growlers have a couple of tags you liked to use that are now deprecated as well..RIGHT?
Bottom line, it's not up to a few web designers, and W3c as well, to determine if a tag will work well for a designers website or not, there's different strokes for different folks.. If the tag pulled too many browser resources to do what it does, then that would be more confining to a hated tag, just as we are encouraged to use CSS in place of the right now Font tags etc.. (And let me State that CSS is great for replacing the older font attribute coding).
Call it disrespect or lack of knowledge of which neither applies to my response to this old topic... It just goes to show that some people can't handle fair argument about certain issues...
I just clearly stated my point of view about the marquee tag, and that I believe it is nonsense the way some of you trash the tag.. I clearly stated the reasons why I considered the the tag useful for certain uses depending on the users use of the tag.. And because I agreed with someone within this thread that didn't quite agree with all of the negativity about this tag, does not imply that I am disrespecting anyone here..
And if you wanna jump on my @ss prematurely about being a first time poster here, then that's fine, but i will not change my view about the way you trash the tag nor my statements of why the tag works for some and not others..
So keep your welcome with you..
I'm no idiot to internet forums, I've used them for over 15 yrs, and I do know some stale members tend to negatively tag new users when they want some type of negative drama.. I clearly believe my response was appropriate to this tag and did not directly disrespect anyone by saying "Nonsense".. So take it as you will..
quote:hotwire said:I just clearly stated...You did no such thing just for the record
Blah Blah Blah...
Clearly Stated: I clearly stated the reasons why I considered the the tag useful for certain uses depending on the users use of the tag.
Clearly Stated: I have sparingly used marquees quite effective with my family website for scrolling member birthdays, and scrolling members who are online... So marquees does have a place for websites and design..
I shouldn't have to make that anymore clear, or do I? GEE WIZ!
And for the record, I have and can also use javascript just as effectively than the marquee, pending on the circumstances, the marquee makes for more simpler coding depending on the information being scrolled. No Problem here.. Just Insane In The Membrane on a Marquee Tag In the Drain..
Didn't know you would crack so easy by calling me names... Don't get me started boy, You've failed to debate my issue on an adult level, so don't start the name callin!
This was all about me expressing my opinion over this original topic, if you can't handle my responses to your failed negative replies, I would leave it alone..
You call me an asshole because I answered your lame reply... Get A Grip.. Lunatic Under the Bed!
By the way.. This 2 year old topic appears to have you by the nuts..
hotwire: You have to admit that starting with " WHAT A BUNCH OF NONSENSE CRAP I'VE READ HERE! " and saying that the marquee tag is deprecated while it's never even part of the standards, and calling nonsense some arguments of the W3C ain't the best way to introduce yourself.
There are more polite ways to express your opinion. And if you disagree with the W3C, nothing forbids you from subscribing to one of the working group's mailing list and defend your point which, if it makes sense, will eventually make its way into a specification.
As for the use cases for a marquee-like behavior, I agree that they exist but IMHO the marquee doesn't serve them right. A proper content scrolling thingy bingy could really use a pause between each first level child node, maybe some visual controls for better accessibility, a sensible fallback, a proper semantic, and an actual specification. That's why I'll stay away from the marquee element and stick to semantic and accessible markup with progressive enhancement.
Yeah, it's quite alright when stale users defend stale users, and with that said I can only partially agree with the NONSENSE CRAP, because I am only stating nonsense to what I perceive as nonsense concerning a few of the replies I read..
But I agree, looking back at the CAPS and the way i stated it, may have been a bit charging on the marquee topic.. I accept your point of view of that..
On the other hand, you point out sensible notations for the behavior, but with that said, I stated for the simple uses of a marquee how and why they will always work for some instances.. and you have to agree I made clear statements on how I find them useful.. however I do note that you stated "IMHO"..
Bottom line, I respect your sensible reply to my statements regarding the LOVED marquee tag, just understand I'm only defending my position which has been skewed by Lunatic as me being some first time hell Raiser, which I am not..
I have learned many things from forums over the years, and I have never went into a forum calling people names because we have different opinions. That would be nonsense.
As far as W3c is concerned, I stated earlier, I'm quite sure all their decisions are not the best, and that I'm quite sure many programmers have tags they love that may have been deemed as deprecated.. So it's no one man issue here..
Anyhow, thanks for the sensible reply, and no ill feeling to you either DL, but I wont kiss up to off topic name callin.. I still defend and will use the marquee when needed. Nuf Said
By the way, I think hawkwind made some pretty good replies regarding the marquee..
For my part, I honestly don't care about the alleged topic (i.e., marquee) anymore. And by this I mean: you want to use it, go for it. More power to you. Yeah, we got caught up in a little discussion a few years back, but at this point I could care less. You want to say that the marquee tag may work for some people? OK, I'm cool with that.
What bugs me is the way you have conveyed your ideas. You said that you weren't being disrespectful... I wouldn't really consider this a matter of respect, just a matter of common courtesy. Having 15 years of experience on internet forums means nothing when meeting a new group of people, because you know nothing about us and we know nothing about you. As poi mentioned (and you seem to have begrudgingly accepted, at least in part), you probably didn't choose the best way to introduce yourself.
quote: hotwire said:
I have learned many things from forums over the years, and I have never went into a forum calling people names because we have different opinions. That would be nonsense.
I cannot agree more. For example, I would not go onto a forum and, in my very first thread, start going on about "stale members." How is this not insulting?
I have no problem with you being new here, and I would not presume to know anything about you or belittle you in any way. I would appreciate it if you would extend us the same courtesy.
For the RECORD, I didn't mean stale to be such a degrading word to you, just my definition of anyone who have been in a place for a long time..
For the RECORD, I don't know why I keep replying to different stale members when I have already explained and lightened the issue over my SO CALLED disrespectful NONSENSE reply..
For the RECORD, there are many other useful things I can be discussing at this moment than stale users ruffled feathers over personal opinions of a new member's comments on how he feel about a deprecated tag..
So Carry on, I'll see if I can make better use of my time with real programming issues than wasting time on who's right or wrong about certain comments within this thread..
quote: Suho1004 said:
What bugs me is the way you have conveyed your ideas. You said that you weren't being disrespectful... I wouldn't really consider this a matter of respect, just a matter of common courtesy. Having 15 years of experience on internet forums means nothing when meeting a new group of people, because you know nothing about us and we know nothing about you. As poi mentioned (and you seem to have begrudgingly accepted, at least in part), you probably didn't choose the best way to introduce yourself
Why Even throw this back as an issue when I clearly pointed and accepted this as not looking as pleasant?? This is how negative drama carries on and on when I already addressed my opinion about this.
I really thought that this was an old dead archived thread and thought my original NONSENSE reply would be a thing in the past, just as this thread was before I hit it with a search.. Didn't know the deprecated tag would stir some of the veteran members as it did.. WOW
So once Again I apologize if the word, in my terms, STALE hurts you.. That's my own personal characterization of old forum members, including myself.. Have a Nice Day..
stale (comparative staler, superlative stalest)
Positive
stale
Comparative
staler
1. Having lost its freshness from age. Stale food, for instance, is food which is still edible but has lost its deliciousness.
The steak is as stale as the beer.
If you don't enter a room for some days, the air will become stale.
2. No longer new; no longer interesting; established; old; as, stale news, a stale joke, etc.
I take the number 2 here, "No Longer New".. That's all I am referring to.
posted 08-18-2006 16:49
you don't. Marquee are bad.
Or have them sit and wait to read it 
