Re: follow up to DavidF fr Nov'08 re: Pub 2007 fr newbie

Karen,

To make this thread a bit easier to follow, I have copied both parts of your
response to this post.

As you did not start with a Publisher template the 'added functionality' is
not important. But if you want to see what I was talking about open any new
web template. Once you have one opened then go to Format > Format
Publication > and in the left hand task column look under the 'Web site
options' to find 'Add functionality...'. Click it and try out some of the
optional template pages that can be added. But as I said, since you built a
custom page, this is unimportant at this point.

Since you are not using a Pub template it really doesn't matter what width
page you are using, and as you had already worked up most of the layout on
the 960 pixel width, then you might want to stay with that one. The only
difference is that you should not limit the length of the page. Change it
back to the default of 4608 pixels for now. The importance of not limiting
the length of your page will become more apparent later in my comments.
Ultimately both the width and the length of your main publication may change
depending on what you decide to do with some of these 'assets' as you put
it.

In general *do not* attach any files to a forum or newsgroup post. Ideally
you would get your pages pretty well done and your site posted and just
provide a link to the website so we could help you with any issues. Only on
rare occasions have we suggested that a copy of the Pub file be made
available here. At this point just tell us about what ever specific problems
you are having, and we will try to offer answers.

Dotster.com does offer "Web Analytics". Spend some time reviewing the FAQs
or Support section on the website to see what is offered with you hosting
plan.

Ok, I understand a bit better about what you meant by assets. Remember that
Publisher is best for small, simple and *static* websites. What you are
envisioning is adding a lot of dynamic features, and is part of the reason
you are having problems. I think you can do most of what you want to do
using the Insert > HTML code fragment tool. However, you are going to be one
to figure out how to do it mostly. That will take some trial and terror and
time on your part figuring out how to use and incorporate the code snippets
from these third party 'asset' providers. Read the instructions.

As per: http://www.juvederm.com/professionals/toolsdownload.aspx I took a
quick look at this, but did not down load the instructions or study the
details of how to use those tools. I did a quick Google search though and
found someone using this:
http://www.schlessingereyeandface.com/BotoxCosmeticTV.htm
If you look at the source code by View > Source you will see that basically
this doctor is using a iframe to import a page from the treatment visualizer
service. In fact you can reproduce what is done on this page. Here is the
iframe code from the source code of this page:

<iframe
src="http://www.botoxcosmetic.com/treatment_visualizer/treatment-visualizer.aspx";
width="100%" height="2250" scrolling="no" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Just open your web publication...one of the ones that doesn't have an
arbitrarily short page length...and copy the above code snippet > Insert >
HTML code fragment and paste. Make the code fragment box as wide as your
page, put it at the bottom of your page and do a web page preview. You will
notice that you import the same page as the doctor did, and that your short
page lengths are not going to cut it. The snippet code indicates that the
page you will import will be 2250 pixels long.

You will need to read their instructions to figure out how to incorporate
this asset correctly and legally according to their rules, but at least you
can see it can be done. Do notice that the way the iframe code snippet is
written that the whole page is also wider than even a 984 pixel wide page.
Read the instructions and see if you can get it to scale to a more narrow
page. Otherwise you may need to open that page outside of your web or build
a custom page to work with it. I think it would be a mistake to make your
whole publication wider than 960 to 984, and I still prefer 760 myself...but
we have had that conversation before.

As to the CareCredit I can see why you might want to include this feature
too. However, I wouldn't ever believe all the hype about how much it will
increase your search engine rankings. Take it all with a grain of salt. Once
again, read the instructions and you will probably end up using the Insert
html code fragment feature to insert their code into your page.

The advantage of using FireFox to test your site is you can do it locally
before you have actually published you site, and from our experience here if
you can get your site to work in both IE and FF, then it will work in other
browsers mostly. If you have started reading the posts in this group you
will already be aware of the 'grouping' issue with IE8, but at least it
doesn't sound like this will affect your navbar as you probably built your
own. Feel free to test your site with the on-line services...can't hurt. At
the same time you need to remember that Publisher is not a code editor, so
if any of these sites suggest that you need to edit the code, you aren't
going to find that very easy or practical. The reason most of us use
Publisher is to avoid the need to edit the code. We really don't care if the
code Publisher produces is 'standards compliant' per se...we only care
whether our pages render correctly and work properly in IE, FF and thus
Opera and Safari and probably the other major browsers. If you want to get
caught up in trying to produce standards compliant code, then you need to
move to a program such as Web Expression.

Change your ruler to pixels so you can see what 720 pixels is. You should
start thinking in pixels anyway...this is a web publication, not a print
publication. Go to Tools > General Tab and change the measurement units to
pixels and now your ruler will be in pixels.

I think I have addressed most of the issues you raised. Just do away with
the Master Page as I suggested, remember that you will have to use the
insert html code fragment tool to incorporate the third party dynamic
features. And you are going to have to be the one reading the instructions
and figuring out how to do that. We don't have time to build your site for
you...or at least I don't. Once again I would first focus on getting the
main parts of your site built and working correctly and then worry about
adding the third party dynamic features. Perhaps just put "coming soon" or
some text on the page where you will put it, and then try to get your basic
page published. Then if you want help on specific problems, post a link to
the site and where you are having the problem, and we will try to help.

Good luck.

DavidF

"karen3b" <karen3b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8D38937F-9BB6-4F6F-A456-948D564F30EB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

DavidF ~

OK. So I will try some more. I will keep in contact with you until I
have the/a website up & running.

I think the lesson here that I'm learning (still & now in this arena)
is one of judgement: to know when to keep perservating and when to step
back
& ask for help. I went way past the "when to ask for help" place. I
can't
be the only person out there that makes this type of mistake -- so
hopefully
these posts will be beneficial to someone else! <grin>

So, while striving to KISS a website design, I did not use a Pub 2007
template. All of them were too "busy" -- I thought. As a result, I
cannot
follow your first set of instructions. I've tried (too hard, of course --
I
tried unsuccessfully to get my simple format categorized as a Pub 2007
format).

What I currently have are 3 webpages:
2 of 'em are very similar in that they both have 90%+ of content, each
with different aspects of the format remaining. One is 960 px wide; the
other is 984 wide. Since I re-sized both of them to get the 960/984
widths,
I've probably lost the ability to add functionality. [I do not know to
which
specific functionalities you are referring. However, I now know that it
is
somehow possible to "loose the ability to add that functionality". And
that
is not good.]
The 3rd one has most of the template bones, complete with 984 px width
(from the beginnning -- not from re-sizing) & waiting for the content to
be
dropped in (I hope).

I would gladly send all 3 to you, since I think a quick gander of them
would be self-explanatory....I just don't know whether or not that is
appropriate. Nor do I know whether or not this forum could physically
handle
the 3 files. I certainly would not mind a public dissection of what I did
wrong -- since such a process would be educational for me -- and hopefully
others. I learn well from mistakes! Mine or others'.

My quick responses to your points:
1) I completely agree: a fast-loading page is more important than
fancy stats. I'll check if Dotster.com offers stats. I will not mess
with
the other ones.
2) The 3 dynamic features/assets I want to include really add interest
to the reader. Boosts the content.
-Two of them are Treatment Visualizers, with which the reader
can either upload a photo of themselves or use a photo that is already
on-site. These Visualizers give readers an idea of what 2 different kinds
of
treatments might look like on their face. Very cool. Very fun to use.
Trust me. Maybe it is a girl-thing.
The other one is cool too -- but in a different way. Access information
about how to afford cosmetic procedures, via no-interest financing. Has a
functional & useful Payment Calculator, a fill-in application for credit
approval, etc. Again, offering more content than the average website.


------------------
My reply was posted in spite of me. [And probably because I tried to use
the
"tab" key twice for formatting purposes.]
Quick responses, cont'd:
2) To sum up, I think these "assets" offer significant value to an
interested viewer. Here are the two URLs so you can check them out for
more
specifics. Treatment visualizers =
http://www.juvederm.com/professionals/toolsdownload.aspx ; CareCredit =
http://www.carecredit.com/webtoolkit/cosmetic/gettingstarted2.html +
instructions =
http://www.carecredit.com/webtoolkit/cosmetic/pdf/gettingstartedpdf.pdf .

Business/traffic-wise reasons to include CareCredit assets are (and I
quote):

"CareCredit's Web Site Tool Kit includes payment calculators, banners,
buttons, and sample website pages to help make it easy to include
information
about financing on your practice web site. Promoting payment options on
your
practice website not only remove cost concerns, but it also drives more
business to your practice.
Higher search engine rankings: by using this kit, your practice website
will
naturally appear higher on sites like Google since CareCredit receives
over
700,000 unique visitors a month."
Convinced? I am. But I'm gullible, too. <big grin>

On to "quick" response 3) Did not know about the darn Master Page. The
concept is great. The implementation of same needs polishing.

4) I will install the FireFox info as you outlined. Thanks for the
warning
about default browser.
So I don't need to submit it to:
a.
http://www.geekestateblog.com/test-our-your-blog-or-website-in-50-different-browsers/
b. http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/ ;
c.
https://www.google.com/accounts/ServiceLoginAuth?service=websiteoptimizer;
nor
d. http://www.addme.com/ ?
5) I so totally gave up on the 960 px format. Did as you suggested: 984.
6) I know the Pub truncates the length to fit.
7) I didn't know -- and still don't really have a feel for -- the size of
720 pxs. I have a feel for a 1,000 word essay -- not for a 720 pxs-
length
chunk of info.
8) I've tried to use the guideline and ruler fxs in Pub'07. I remain
mystified about why the divisions don't show up evenly divided. By
futzing,
I think I've managed to more-or-less hit the
"most-important-content-before-the-fold-line" rule. Although I've
expended
at least 10 times the amount of time/energy doing so than if I could
easily
manipulate the guidelines.
9) 'Content is King.' O, yes. However, what is too rudimentary and what
is
too esoteric is up for interpretation. Hopefully I've come up with a
syngery
of content that is valuable enough for viewers. Feedback welcome!
10) I still would like other useful functions. But first I will work on
what I've got.

Thank you very much. It may take a village to raise a child -- it also
takes a community for Karen to raise a website!

--
karen3b


"DavidF" wrote:

Karen3b,

Perhaps I did you a disservice when I gave you those resources, as you
seem
to have gotten lost in the theory of web design, which is an open ended
subject. I looked up your post in November:
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign/browse_thread/thread/aa4902dd501f9f69/1e7d1c73418dc62d?lnk=gst&q=webpagesthatsuck#1e7d1c73418dc62d

You were concerned in that post about keeping all the content of your
pages
"above the fold" because that is what you had read somewhere. I
congratulated you on spending some time planning your site, and offered
those resources because you seemed interested in learning more about
webdesign theory. Unfortunately it sounds like you missed some of the
more
important points I tried to make, and have spent your time overly
concerned
with the theory.

The approach I take in this newsgroup is to first answer a poster's
question
as best I can without judgment as to the merits of the question or the
motivation behind the question. Then I will sometimes add comments and
suggestions that are more judgmental and opinionated. In your case I
probably should have suggested that what was probably most important to
remember is that 'content is king'. I probably should have been more
emphatic and judgmental and said that yes, be sure to put your most
important information in the first few paragraphs, but don't worry about
how
long a page is. If you get a viewer's attention in the first few
paragraphs,
they will happily scroll down for more. It is not so important how long
your
page is vs. how good the content is. Of course avoid being verbose as I
tend
to be <grin>, but don't compulse about the length of your pages.

The other thing I should have stressed is my belief in the KISS
principle.
Some of the 'best' sites I have seen are very simple in design. Some of
the
worst are built by the 'professionals' where they incorporate all the
newest
flash, bang and whiz to the point where the page takes 5 minutes to load,
and all the bells and whistles overwhelm the content of the site. Kind of
the forest for the trees sort of thing. That is why I like the
websitesthatsuck site. It reminded me to 'keep things simple stupid' as I
built my sites. It is also part of the reason I still use Publisher to
build
my sites. It forces me to KISS.

That is my general advice to you now. Step back and put all that
knowledge
you have obtained in perspective. You have figured out your content, how
you
want to structure your site and navigate through it, so you are finished
with the hard part. The mechanics of putting it together with Publisher
is
the easy part if you start off with KISS in mind. Get the basics built
and
then add dynamic features *IF* they actually contribute the message you
are
trying to communicate to the viewer. If they don't, leave them out. Just
because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. For example, I see
absolutely no reason to put a counter on a page. This contributes nothing
to
the viewer's experience. You don't see it on any of the big, professional
sites do you? But this is a personal, biased opinion and to each there
own.

I guess what I am trying to say in all of this is that there is no reason
you can't build your own site, and that perhaps your time would have been
better spent reading the posts to this newsgroup instead of reading and
studying webdesign theory. All the problems you are having, have been
talked
about in probably the last month alone. So take a deep breath and let's
deal
with some of the specific problems you are having.

Page size and length: If you insist upon a 960 pixel wide page, then so
be
it. Or use the default 984 pixel width that Publisher offers in Pub 2007.
But *don't* worry about the length...leave it alone. This is an important
point you missed in the November discussion. Publisher 2007 will by
design
automatically truncate the page after the last design element on the page
when you convert the publication to a web page. You will see this when
you
do a web page preview that the page is only as long as your content. If
your
content is a bit longer than 720 pixels then it will give you a page that
is
a bit longer. If it is less then it will give you a shorter page. Once
again, focus on the content, not the final length of the page. If you
don't
want the pages of your site to be much longer than 720 pixels, then
either
change the content to fit that much space or when you get down that far
on
the page, add a link to the next page for the rest of the content. Don't
create a future problem for yourself by designing your publication page
length only 720 pixels long. What if someday you decide that you really
do
what to add more than 720 pixels worth of content? You would have to redo
your whole site.

If you started with one of the Publisher templates, create a new
publication. First open your current publication. Now go to File > New >
Web
Sites. Now instead of choosing your template scroll to the bottom of the
that page to the blank sizes. I recommend since you want a wider page,
choose the 984 X 4608 blank pages. Create it. Now, if you really want a
960
pixel page, then in the left hand task column you will see under
'Publication Options' the option to change your page size. Click that
button
and in the Page Setup dialog, you will see in the upper right side the
width
and height. Put in 960 for the width, but leave the length alone.

Now that you have your blank page sized the way you want it, look again
to
the task column under Publication Options and find 'Apply a template'.
Click
it, and find your template. Select it, choose the navbar setup you want
to
use, etc and click ok > Apply template to the current publication.
Publisher
will scale all the template banners and such to fit your new custom
width.
And now it is a matter of adding the same number of pages of your
original
publication and copy and pasting your content from your old publication
to
the new. If you had some specialized publisher template pages in your
original publication, once again go to the task column/bar and select
'Add
functionality...'. This will give you the option to add those specialized
template pages. It is important that you do not try to resize your
current
publication as you will loose the ability to add that 'functionality',
but I
won't get into that right now.

Now, had you read the posts in this group for the last few months you
would
already know that you *should not* use a Master Page with a web
publication!
Don't put anything on a Master page, and especially don't put the
navbars.
They won't work correctly. So even if you have decide to try to repair
your
current publication rather than create a new publication of the correct
size, drag all the content off the Master page into the gray scratch area
beside your page, switch back to the regular page view and drag the
content
from the scratch area onto the main pages.

As to installing "assets", I am not 100% sure of what you mean, but I
have
stated that if you want to add some other dynamic features be sure that
you
really need them. Stat counters? Most web hosts already offer webstats
and
you may not need to add others. Go to your host site and read what they
provide. Chances are they will be more than you can understand or need at
this point. Personally I would avoid the Google analytics at this point.
A
number of people who post here on occasion have used them and highly
recommend them. However, when I view their sites the pages take an
abnormally long time to load because of what is happening in the
background
to collect those stats. In my opinion the Google stats are less important
than a fast loading page, especially if your webhost already provides
stats.
The important point here is to forget about installing "assets" that you
might not even need until you get the basic site up and running. You can
update it later.

Testing your site on various URLs: Once again, just keep it simple.
Download
and install FireFox: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/ It is a
relatively small download and an easy installation, and as long as you
choose to opt out of making it your default browser, it should not create
a
problem for you. Then when you want to test your site 'Publish to the
Web'
and direct your web files to your local computer hard drive where you can
easily find them. I keep a test folder on my desktop for this purpose and
just publish to the folder. Then open that folder, find the index.htm
file
or the other .htm files in the index_files folder, right click, open
with,
FireFox. If you can get your site to look good and work well in both IE
and
FF then it will also work in most other browsers. (You might want to read
one of the posts about the compatibility issues with IE8.)

Once again, remember to KISS. Forget about adding "assets" until you get
the
basic page up and running and working correctly. Then you can go back and
add them if you really think they are necessary...or if you just wanna do
so. And if you have problems come back and we will help you. Just
remember
that too many bells and whistles will just distract the viewer from the
content...

So this time I offered my opinion before answering your question. No, I
do
not know anyone to refer you to. Just do it yourself...it really isn't
rocket science. You are making it more difficult than it need be. Good
luck.

DavidF


"karen3b" <karen3b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8CE16250-3155-490D-ACDF-5343CC9A339C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
DavidF ~
You last gave me some resources with which to educate myself about how
to
plan & design a website. I immersed myself in them & learned a lot.
(e.g.,
http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/;http://msmvps.com/blogs/dbartosik/articles/80566.aspx;http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/publisher/HA100947601033.aspx;http://webdesignfromscratch.com/).
Excellent resources. Thanks again.

I now know lots more. I have all the content & the design done. I
have
functional links within the webpage as well as to outside sites. I've
kept
text boxes from overlapping visuals/objects. Etc.

Hours later. No, months of days & hours later, I confess that the
Master
Page has mastered me. [The final straw was when I lost the already-hot
horizontal navigation bar while I was trying to re-size the pages to
960 x
720.]

By now, I am also intimated by two profession-specific websites that
state
a webmaster should do the work necessary to install "assets" from their
websites. I haven't even tried.

Do you have referrals of folk that can finish my webpage in Pub 2007?
I
already have a list, itemizing what needs to be added or tweaked. I
even
have the urls listed for the assets, plus the urls for the download
instructions. Plus the urls for testing the website on different
browsers,
optimizing, and stat counters that also analyze traffic (all free, and
well-rated).

I really need the website up and running. I give up.
--
karen3b






.

Loading