Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?

One more glass photo pixel and I'll scream! My brain is fried!

How do you get Pub to tile the image for a web background (just what I need
- more graphics!)

I know I can't get that fancy with Pub, but I am wondering about a search
capabillity. Something for the NEXT update.

"Mike Koewler" wrote:

Kat,

Why not create your own textured background? Word Art or similar ought
to work. Save it as a jpg file and then use it.

I don't think Pub or any WYSIWYG web design program will easily allow
you to replicate something like the guild site. It uses a lot of
Javascript and other goodies. But you could add a search engine once you
accumulate enough pieces. You would have to provide a description of
each page but then a search would turn up the piece(s) the visitor is
looking for.

Yes, that page is also over 800 pix wide and visitors using a smaller
screen will get scroll bars. Every survey I have seen show that at least
1/3 of all visitors use a smaller screen (800x600 or less).

Mike

The Kat wrote:

I've been watching the jpg file sizes - and have done a batch of resizing.
I'm getting even the logo stuff into 100 ppi format; Pub compresses them to
96 or 72 - whichever it wants, but 100 is easy for me to work with (ie:
calculate!).

Very slick site offering similar items: guild.com. Any idea if Pub will
handle a background wash like this? I have it as a background on several
pages. Alas, I can't get the textured background used in one of the Pub
schemes to tile for a background - just one in the middle is ... less than
satisfactory.

I'm getting nervous again. Just looking at a site like Guild can do that.

They have pages set wider than 800, too. See what you think.

Back to glass photos

The Kat

"Mike Koewler" wrote:


Kat,

To find out the size of the published site - publish it to an empty
folder on your hard drive. In Windows Explorer (not IE!), right click on
that folder and click properties. You can also check file sizes of
images to see if any of them seem large. If so, I would try to make them
smaller.

Mike

The Kat wrote:

David,

The good news is that I got the links working in IE browser on my own
computer. They should work once I load the files onto the server. Glass Art
handed me 3 more photos yesterday that need to go up with the first try. I've
got one of them done, but one needs serious editing. I'm trying to get that
one taken with a digital camera so it will be easier to work on, but he
"hates to bug the client.''

Mike suggested I resize the pages, so I've been squeezing thing together.
Big question: what size font should I use? Most of the site is in 10 pt
Trebuchet with a few larget accents in Comic sans. I prefer the san serif
fonts (and Pub want to create the entire site with Georgia, despite all my
format modifications). Suggestions welcome.

I need to calculate just how large this site is. The way Pub stores the HTML
in different folders makes this difficult. I do know I've got a bunch of
photos in it.

Also, where is the index page? I can't find one anywhere - never could. NOW
what have I done? To edit the site I open a file called "pdesgal" that Pub
created; it is linked to all the pages.

As Dvorak always said: "Real Soon Now." That's when I'll get the site up. At
least thanks to you all I can see the light and the end of the tunnel and
feel fairly sure it's not a fast freight.

"DavidF" wrote:



Mike,

I can use all the suggestions and feedback I can get...thanks.

The bigger the site, the harder it is to organize it and the navigation
system...and the more important it is to organize it well. Otherwise as you
suggested with your experience, you end up down the road at a dead end, or
at least a cul-de-sac.;-)

If you have only 5 or 10 pages...maybe even 15 to 20 pages, then producing
the whole site in one Publisher file, and using the navigation wizard to
produce your navbar/menu with relative links, is probably the best way to
go. Add a page...delete a page, and the wizard automagically redoes the menu
so everything is linked together. And as I understand it, this is the way it
also works in Serif WebPlus.

The problems start when your site grows to 50 to 100+ pages. This is when
many people move to different dynamic web applications to produce their
sites. I, perhaps foolishly, chose to stay with Publisher and found that it
was easier to manage the site by breaking it up into sections and
subfolders. When I did this, I was also forced to give up on using the
navigation wizard that wrote relative links and start using absolute links.
In fact, Publisher 2000's menu wizard would only produce 10 pages.

Kat is using Pub 2003 which allows pretty much as many pages as you want,
and the navigation wizard will add them to the menu. The only reason I
suggested that he consider breaking up the site was his comments about some
pages needing to be updated frequently. I guess I felt it might be a good
idea to produce these variable pages with one or more separate Publisher
files, and then linking them together with absolute links. I just thought it
might be easier to manage that way. Just as an example, say he sold a
selection of rings, watches, and necklaces. I would consider creating a
separate Publisher file for each category, and create a new Publisher file
if I added another category. He could use the Pub navigation wizard to
create a menu if he needed multiple pages within a category, and then if he
sold out of a particular ring, or added two models of rings, he would only
have to edit the Ring Publisher file.

I guess the bottom line is that I have no idea of what he is wanting to do,
and your point is well taken. For most people using Publisher, they should
not worry about breaking the site up into subfolders...nor do they need to.
It will be a lot easier letting Publisher's navigation wizard manage the
links....and as you said, you won't have to remember where the files are
:-).

DavidF

"Mike Koewler" <wordwiz@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:5c0b6$45d79dd1$d844dc4e$12832@xxxxxxxxxxx


David,

Since you gave me the suggestion (or at least encouraged me to do what I
needed to do), I found there's a great thing and a horrible thing about
using sub-folders or different files for pages:

You have to write absolute links, not a relative one.

Horrible, as I have to remember the exact location of the file. Great, as
I don't have to redo all my links.

Now, before everyone decides to use a horde of sub-folders or different
files for their web site, consider how your site is structured and
updated. If you are going to have several categories that will keep
growing, then I would set up a file for each category. This will keep the
file size down (saving time with Save, Autosave, Publish, etc.) as well as
provide a measure of safety if your file becomes corrupted - and it will
if you add a lot of pages week after week.

OTOH, if one is going to just update a site periodically and not worry
about keeping the old news, or adding a lot of pages over a period of
time, there's probably not a good reason to split sites.

Of course, YMMV, Take this with grain of salt, Buyer Beware, E. Pluribus
Unum, NaNa-NaNa, This Cat is where it's at, etc.!

Mike




DavidF wrote:


I'm back. answers in line


"The Kat" <TheKat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1D55872F-9154-4037-BCB4-86271144786A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



Now YOU lost ME. I just did a "save as" of the optimized file because I
was
unsure what would happen if I re-optimized the files after I added new
pictures. At least I can uncheck the allow PNG before any more of them
breed
in my program. The site uses LOTS of photos - stained glass, fused glass,
jewelry,... and each piece is unique.



Sorry about that. To clarify, when I was talking about using Publish to
the Web vs. Save As , I was referencing the way you produce your html
files...not the way you save your Pub file. I think it is always a good
idea of doing a Save As to a new name when you make any major change in a
Pub file. Its nice to have that original to go back to.






I will have to oupdate the files frequently as new pieces are created and
new jewelry styles come out. Will it be best to replace the entire page
and
load that up instead of trying to place each new photo into the niche of
the
old one?




One of the places where Publisher starts to feel its limits is when the
website gets big, and when you have pages that need to be updated
frequently. When my site grew, I decided to break it up and produce it
with multiple Publisher files. I have several parts of my site that get
updated at least monthly, and I produce these with seperate Publisher
files.

Depending on how you have things organized, you might be better off using
multiple Pub files. Reference this article by David Bartosik: Building a
web site with multiple Publisher web publication files:
http://msmvps.com/blogs/dbartosik/archive/2006/01/16/81264.aspx
I approach it a bit different than David though. I just create subfolders
on my site for the different sections, and continue to use the index.htm
as the default file name. Rather than mixing all those files in one
folder, I find it easier to manage the files on my site when they are
organized in separate subfolders...more like I have them organized on my
computer. I also tend to just delete the entire contents of those
subfolders before I upload the updated HTML. This is probably not
necessary, but I like an empty folder and to avoid the possibility of
orphaned image files that aren't overwritten by the new files. To each
their own. Sometimes if it is only a word or two, I just change out the
index.htm file. You will need to decide what makes sense for you. One
caveat...you will probably need to abandon the navbar wizard and build
your own navbar or menu with absolute links...







Should I presume the larger files will be the 400 pixel ones (sorry - NOT
dpi, I meant pixels!). I use Photoshop for the image fixes and crops. The
ones in the site now are at 100 DPI so the 400 "DPI" of which I spoke was
400
pixels across = 4" on my resize. Is this a reasonable size for the "big"
shots? How do I link the little PUB thumbnails to the larger files? And
WHEN?
Before I save as HTML and move that to the site or after the site is up?




When you resize and optimize your images, I would agree with Rob. Make
the images 400 pixels (or whatever final width you want), and at 72 or 96
dpi, for your "large" version. I find that 400 pixel wide images give me
enough detail, but you might need larger, and perhaps not need that large
depending on the photo. Try different sizes until you find the smallest
that works for you. I use 100 or 150 pixel wide images for thumbnails.
100 can be awful small... As to linking the two, you didn't take the time
to read the article I referenced did you? ;-) The short of it is that you
will upload your large size images to a subfolder on your site, and link
to them from your thumbnails. Here is the reference again: How to
Thumbnail in Publisher 2003 Web Publications:
http://pubs.logicalexpressions.com/Pub0009/LPMArticle.asp?ID=564







That's where you lost me - you say "publish to the web" and I don't have
a
clue how to do that! I was planning to load HTML files that PUB creates
each
time I save.




I don't know if you are still confused about this or not, but when you
produce the html files from Publisher you can click on the little icon,
or File > Publish to the Web. If you produce your html files this way
they are "filtered" and your over all file size and loading time is
minimized. What I didn't want you to do was go to File > Save As > Save
as type, a web page in html format. That results in unfiltered html, that
you don't want. Part of the confusion is that in Pub 2000, you do produce
your html files via the Save As approach, and in Pub 2002 you do
something different. Sorry if I confused you. Here is a brief outline of
the whole process that might clear things up: Prepare, publish, and
maintain your Publisher Web site:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/publisher/HA011053521033.aspx

Now then, its all clear as mud, eh?

DavidF




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?
    ... The Back to top links are needed on the FAQ, Adornments, and Glass art pages. ... I was referencing the way you produce your html ... One of the places where Publisher starts to feel its limits is when the ... When you resize and optimize your images, ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?
    ... server will let me use Publisher; I had intended to change it to HTML & FPage ... When you resize and optimize your images, ... on the photo. ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?
    ... Think I understand what you're saying about the upload. ... I was referencing the way you produce your html ... One of the places where Publisher starts to feel its limits is when the ... When you resize and optimize your images, ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?
    ... Discovered one reason I could not set up the background I wanted: Publisher is looking only in its PUB60COR files for graphics for the website. ... I also tend to just delete the entire contents of those subfolders before I upload the updated HTML. ... dpi, I meant pixels!). ... I find that 400 pixel wide images give me enough detail, but you might need larger, and perhaps not need that large depending on the photo. ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: How can I hyperlink to an enlarged picture in Publisher 2003?
    ... They should work once I load the files onto the server. ... The way Pub stores the HTML ... I, perhaps foolishly, chose to stay with Publisher and found that it ... When you resize and optimize your images, ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)