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

As you suggested, I looked @ the 'add functionality' option. Looks like an
automatic transmission, in comparison to a stick shift where you have to
double-clutch. I learned on the double-clutch perspective. Waste of time.

Since I've now moved just about everything over to a newly-built 984 px
site, I'll just keep it. For this one, I went to: Popular Publication
Types, Web Sites, Blank Sizes, Web 984x4608. So I'm good to go.

Will not attach any files. Thanks.

I went to Dotster & saw that they offer webstats. Haven't studied what they
offer. I probably don't need the sophistication that they already offer. So
whatever they offer, I'll use.

Ahhh, sooo. The 'assets' are considered dynamic. Ahhhh sooo. I'll get
everything else functional, then tackle the dynamic stuff. I'll copy & paste
the info about the Tx Visualizers, etc. 'tis nice to know that it is
possible. And that I need an iframe. I will follow your instructions. And
Google what an iframe is! After everything else is working. I can do Trial,
Terror and Time. As long as I know that I only have 2 arenas in which to
endure it. I really can read instructions. Now, if I just know enough to
know how to follow same instructions!

OK. Just IE8 & FF. Good. Less is more.

Standards compliant sounds idealist. I'll be lucky to have my 'pages render
correctly and work properly'. Coding is not my passion.

Have changed to pixels. Thanks.

Don't know how to do away with MP. [can that be done in Pub'07?] Do know
how to Ignore MP and will do so from now on. Promise.

Have posted on my NavBar questions/problems elsewhere. Just looked up the
name of the design from which I used the NavBars: 'Tabs'. Notice the 3
stacked boxes to the left of the text bar? There's 9 of 'em on my website.
Little boxes that go off-center at the merest breeze whispering past....

Am starting to figure out why you said that I'd gone too far on the theory.
Obviously I still don't know enough to know what to use when. Or where. Or
even how! This is where a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. To me.

I'll get busy, and keep you posted. I really want to also add email list
function, blog function, and medical form capabililty. I won't. Not until
the basics are functional. And then the dynamic assets have to be
functional. Then, if I'm still upright & sane....

Many, many thanks.

"DavidF" wrote:

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
.