Topic: DHTML and JS usage (Page 1 of 1)

Hello everyone: I hope this is the correct Thread for this otherwise I apologise. I need constructive comments on the usage of DHTML on my site at http://www.digitalchalice.com
I am rather new to this so please be gentle! Any incompatibilities with Browsers please let me know details
All comments appreciated

Xcalibur

You already posted this link for review 4 months ago in New WebSite - please express opinions .
As far I can tell absolutely nothing has changed. You have not even addressed the points people raised in that previous thread. So sorry if I'm not too gentle.


Opening your link in Op9.5 b9721, Fx3 b4, Sf 3.1 gives nothing but a black screen. It only shows something in IE8 b1, but prompts to install a Windows Media Player add-on. End of the story. Bye bye.


Here's what I had in Opera's error console:

JavaScript - http://www.digitalchalice.com/
Event thread: load
Error:
name: ReferenceError
message: Statement on line 11: Undefined variable: isNS
Backtrace:
  Line 11 of inline#3 script in http://www.digitalchalice.com/: In function sniff
     isOtherBrowser = (!isIE && !isNS); 
  Line 30 of inline#3 script in http://www.digitalchalice.com/: In function initMic
     sniff();
  Line 1 of function script 
    initMic(); return false
  ...
stacktrace:   ...  Line 30 of inline#3 script in http://www.digitalchalice.com/: In function initMic
     sniff();
  Line 1 of function script 
    initMic(); return false
  ...

In Firefox I got a continuous stream of messages:

Deprecated method document.getSelection() called.  Please use window.getSelection() instead.

In Safari same error as Opera:

Can't find variable: isNS
http://www.digitalchalice.com/ (line 11)

have you even tested your site ?


If your users are required to use IE, install Windows Media Player, Flash and Quicktime to " fully experience what you have to offer ", I bet not many will return. I do not know what I'm supposed to experience but it feels like a total accessibilty disaster. And I don't even have any accessibility requirement myself.


Whatever it is you want people to experience, they should not be required to use YOUR browser of choice and install 3 plugins. Content should be accessible to everyone under all circumstances. JavaScript should be used to progressively enhance web pages/apps. Ditto for images or CSS.


I am not amused by this thread. Have you even read what people took the time to write 4 months ? I guess you didn't since you did not even replied, and I can find again some of the code snippets I pointed last time.

This feels like very very sloppy job, and spam.




(Edited by poi on 03-19-2008 04:51)

Strangely enough, people raised the same issues in 2003 in your site review thread for this very site on www.htmlforums.com.



(Edited by poi on 03-19-2008 05:13)

Thank you Poi for your comments
I do NOT spam - I simply wanted to see if the browser situation has changed in the last period of time. I have tested it on several types of PCs and MACs too. It all works fine - even on my PC bought last year and running default OS - XP Professional
Im afraid Poi that its not my fault that the Browser developers can not agree to produce compatible products - its like HDD v Blue-Ray and the users suffer. The plugins should be there by default and if people wish to switch them off so be it

Also, if one wants to fly one needs an aeroplane, if you wish to do Internet Banking you must have the cookies turned on and if you wish to experience DigitalChalice Im afraid you need the plugins unless you are content with ASCII text pages and DOS
I shall engage a web developer to help me with the "compatibility" issues as I do wish to share all that the Chalice has to offer

Again thank you for your words

Xcalibur

I fear you're under a servere misconception.
If your page was standards compliant (and that's the only thing compability can be supported for), your site would run in any browser.

It might not look pixel-identical in each of them, but it would not degenerate into a completely black screen.
But alas, you've created a javascript monstrosity, obfuscated/compressed even, that I wouldn't even start to see where it errs,
and you're blaming other people for your own trouble when they stem from oyour missunderstanding of a many to many market.

Have you really tried opera on your machine? It's free to download, you know,
and the pc you bought last year is not especially representative of what's out there.

xcalibur: You've got to be kidding.
Do you have any grasp about the web ?

I happen to know a thing or two about browser vendors and standard bodies and let me tell you that they will NOT modify the implementations and specifications to please YOUR not standard compliant site which uses obsolete and syntactically wrong code*. They don't even do so for the Google, Yahoo!, ... at "best" browser vendors add JS patches for bad code relying on a specific (broken) imlementation of a standard.

*: Browser detection has always been wrong and will always be. Not declaring the variables before hand will certainly not help make this work.

If plugins are plugins it is for a reason : they are not open standards and potentially cripled with patent traps, therefore browser vendors can NOT implement them directly in the browser. Although some plugins have high market penetration ( e.g. Flash ), they are not the norm and web sites/apps should NOT rely on them. They should be used for progressive enhancement, not as the only way to access your content.


Reading how you imagine the web is, I don't even see why you ask for site reviews. Also it's kinda ironic to read someone complain about browsers not agreeing on standards while obviously only testing in IE.

If you were remotely serious about putting something on the web, you would at least test in another browser. At best in all 4 major browsers with plugins on/off, JS on/off, CSS on/off. All these browsers are free.


As Tyberius Prime outlined, you seem oblivious of the many people using web. Like it or not but people are plenty and access the web in many ways : and no, they don't always choose how they do so.


You may not spam, but I felt insulted by your opening of 2 site review threads after TOTALLY ignoring the feedback you received 4 months ago and 5 years ago. Hence the suspicion of spam.



(Edited by poi on 03-19-2008 15:49)

Notet that I'd be curious enough to see a video of your site and try to review it based on that, but I'm certainly not going to install 2-3 plugins.

In FF2, all I get is a black screen; I'm not a web developer, but that doesn't seem right.

In IE7, the black screen is quickly replaced by a white one ("waiting for...noplugin.htm"). As I typed this, it finally told me to come back when I've finished installing plugins...

If that's what the site is supposed to do, then it does a great job of it.

Having no idea what hides behind that colourful 80's exterior, I have no motivation to install plugins, so I go back to playing Scrabulous and trolling Ozone. Curiosity doesn't overwhelm me in this case.

xcalibur: What do you use the various plugins for on your site ? Unless there is something I don't know about WMP and QT, I'm pretty sure Flash is all you need to add all the bells and whistles you want to an acessible and standard compliant page.

To me it seems quite clear that it's just a little bit of history repeating.