Articles Written By The Doodlekit Staff
- Doodlekit will be FREE!
Yep, we will be releasing a free version of Doodlekit for all to use, indefinitely. No more 30 day trials. The free version will have the following:- Blog
- Photo Albums (up to a 100 photos max at any one time) with Slide Shows.
- The ability to add up to 5 extra pages/sub pages in addition to the photo album pages, blog, and contact form.
- Full access to all our layouts, color schemes, and background images.
- Access to Stock Photos for headers and content.
- Access to the CSS Override Editor for advanced users who know how to code CSS. Advanced users will be able to upload their own design images and write the code to design their own websites.
- Free websites will be sub-domains of www.doodlekit.com.
- Doodlekit will have a Shopping Cart!
Doodlekit will offer an advanced plan that will allow you to create your own shopping cart via a PayPal account that you have created. - All Doodlekit websites will be W3C Strict XHTML & CSS compliant!
While most Doodlekit users won’t care much about this, web developers/designers will understand the significance of this and appreciate it (especially those who will use our CSS Override Editor). - Doodlekit will have a New & Improved Page Editor!
The new doodlekit page editor will be more reliable and easier to use than the older editor. It will allow you to create one, two, and three column layouts as well as add images directly to your web pages from you computer, Doodlekit Photo albums, or other websites. - Stock Photo/Image Repository.
We have added a searchable library of Stock images to use in your website headers and content. We will be starting with over 2000 images and adding more every day! You will be able to swap out images in your content & headers as often as you like. - Doodlekit will work with 94.1% of all browsers world wide.
Doodlekit websites will function properly with the following browsers: IE 6.0+, Firefox 1.5+, Opera 9+, and Safari 3.0+.
Let us know if you have any questions or comments. We look forward to hearing from you!
Before you draw anything, you will need to figure out some things first:
1) What resolution do you want to develop to?
2) What layout do you want to use?
3) Will your content be static, dynamic, or mixture of both?
The first thing to figure out is what desktop resolution you are going to develop to. Based on information from http://browsersize.com/, all web user desktops worldwide can be broken up into these percentages:
1024 x 768 - 56%
800 x 600 - 22%
1280 x 1024 - 13%
1152 x 864 - 3%
other - 6%
When actually drawing a website design up in an image editor, don't forget to subtract 30px from the width for your layouts. This is to accommodate the scrollbar that will appear to the right when content exceeds the screen height. Example: for a resolution of 800x600, your design should be 770px in width.
The main number you want to look at here is the width (the first number). Scrolling down is fairly well accepted as normal behavior for a website by all users. So the height is not as important as the width. Scrolling across is a different story. You will never want your design to have horizontal scrollbars at the bottom of the page. You will need to pay special attention to the width of your design when developing. If someone's desktop resolution is smaller than the resolution you designed to, they will have scrollbars at the bottom of their page and this will be deemed to be an unpleasant "viewing experience" for that user. The lower the resolution of your design, the more people that can be included in those that will have a nicer "viewing experience".
Before you just jump to the highest used resolutions (1024 x 768), consider your market. Who are you developing your website for? If your website is a forum about Java Web Development or CSS Web Design, then it's probably safe to figure that most of your users will be tech savvy. That means they will probably have nicer/newer computers, which means that you could probably develop to 1024 x 768 without worrying about to many people having a bad "viewing experience". On the other hand, if you are developing a website for a non-profit organization that provides free food and clothing to families with low incomes, you probably want to stick to 800x600. Your target audience probably can't afford the latest computers and may more than likely have older computers that were given away to them or purchased at a very cheap price. Another example is older people with bad eyesight - if your website draws in lots of senior citizens, they will probably want to see things at a lower resolution to make text and images larger.
You might also want to consider whether or not you want to ignore a quarter your market's "viewing experience". If your website is for a company that markets to the general public, I doubt their marketing department will like this. They will more than likely want something that looks appealing to everyone. This can be done easily by designing to 800x600 desktops. In fact, sometimes it's nice to have a background for your design. For those people who use higher resolutions, you can create more of an esthetically pleasing look to your design by having a background.
The second thing to figure out is what layout you want to use. A layout is how headers, footers, content, sidebars, etc. are placed on your page. Not every page has to have the same layout. For instance, you may want a unique layout just for your index (entry) page. That's fine, as long as most of the other pages on your site are consistent in their layout.
There are all sorts of layouts you can go with. There are those with menus on the side, menus on the top, some with sidebars and side boxes, and some without. There are those whose width stretch to fill your screen (liquid) and those whose width is a set size (static). Lots of possibilities here. A good place to look at some example layout can be found at the Layout Gala: http://blog.html.it/layoutgala/. This site provides the code for some of the most popular base layouts used in web design. All these layouts use valid markup and CSS, and have been tested successfully on Internet Explorer/win 5.0, 5.5, 6 and beta 2 preview of version 7; Opera 8.5, Firefox 1.5 and Safari 2. A great starting point for your web design. Again, keep in mind the two types of basic layouts: static and liquid. If you use a liquid layout, you will still need to determine the minimal width. It should be equal to the width of the resolution you have decided to design to. Your content should "float" appropriately as the browser is resized - either to the left, right, or center until they overflow, at which point they should float downward, pushing all your content down. Once you have reached your minimal width you have designed your site for, you are no longer accountable for your users "viewing experience". The content can overlap and run into each other... this now acceptable. You can try and force it to be static once it has reached its minimal width, at which point it will show horizontal scrollbars. This is sometimes deemed to be more pleasant than letting your content overlap itself. This is up to you.
Finally, you need to consider your content. Is it going to be fairly static? Will the content be updated by users frequently? Is there dynamic data that is used for content that comes from a database? Does the site use a content manager? The important thing here is to design to your content. In general, you should avoid designing static height pages... they should stretch appropriately to accommodate the data that is present on the page. This is one of the mistakes I see a lot of from graphic designers that don't know anything about the web. They code a watermark background that looks cool for a page of an exact height of, say, 600px because that was how big the page was with its content. But then a month later someone goes in adds some more content -now the website has an 800px height, and there is 200px at the bottom of the page that doesn't have a watermark and is even a completely different color/look than what was used for the first 600px. As a web designer you have to be aware of when to use "repeatable background images" or colors for backgrounds with dynamic data. Sometimes you can use static images or horizontal repeating images at the top or bottom, as long as they gracefully blend into the main background eventually.
This is also important for menus. Using a static image, like a tab, is fine as long as you are willing to go into an image editor and create a new tab every time you need to. However, you might consider using repeatable images/solid colors with text that automatically stretches when content is added. To do this is more complicated, but will save you time in the future. Plus, if you're using a content management system, this will be mandatory. You will have no idea how long someone might make their menu link, so you will need to be prepared for links that wrap and/or stretch dynamically. Again, solid colors or repeatable background can be used here. The doodlekit website builder tool is an example of when you would want to consider this. Advanced web designers that use this tool will need to consider these rules when developing. Some of the more complicated designs used by doodlekit have repeatable images/colors in the middle, and static images at the top and bottom, or on the left and right sides that blend into the middle.
Once you have figured out the resolution you want to design to, picked your layout, and determined how dynamic your content is, you are ready to finally start drawing! Keeping these in mind will determine how and what you design. When it comes time to convert it to an actual website, your web designer/developer will thank you!
I put an ad in at SitePoint a few days ago for ‘CSS Web Designers" to try out doodlekit for free and to offer 3 of the best designers a free website. What did I get? I got a handful of people who only knew Dreamweaver or some other WYSIWYG editor apply... but none that actually understood or worked with HTML/XHTML and CSS.
Wow.
So I started looking around the web. Maybe I wasn't using the right terminology. Looks like I was correct. The appropriate word I should have posted was ‘hand-coder'. Hand-coders are those individuals that write their own HTML/XHTML and CSS (like me).
There has been a large controversy over whether or not those individuals who use Dreamweaver, Front Page, and other WYSIWYG tools should be considered web developers. Both sides have good points. Below are some links to discussions/articles about this very subject:
To me most if it falls into this type of analogy about breakfast at a restaurant:
- You can have breakfast served to you in 5 minutes created from frozen pre-made items that have been heated up in a microwave and served with a cup of generic coffee. Most of the time it's OK... but sometimes your hash brown or egg biscuit is still frozen in the middle or over cooked.
- You can have breakfast made from scratch, where the cook knows every ingredient and can change those ingredients for each individual plate - served exactly the way you like it - but it takes a little longer and costs a little more.
Which is better? Of course, that depends. If your in a hurry and need something done within a certain timeframe, on a tight budget, and are willing to take chances on quality - choice #1 would be best. If you are into quality and are more of a perfectionist - choice #2.
I will say this however - no WYSIWYG will ever be comparable to a hand-coder (unless it's a bad hand-coder!). There are just too many situations where you have to pop the hood to find out why something isn't working the way it is supposed to be. And even if you know a lot about HTML/XHTML and CSS, when you use a WYSIWYG, you get stuck with a generic "framework" that might not have been the best choice. You can throw some salt and pepper and maybe even some ketchup on that egg McMuffin, but its still just an egg McMuffin.
The best example that I can think of for becoming a hand-coder vs. a WYSIWYG user is this:
What I mean is that dkadvanced is all about overwriting existing CSS from our doodlekit™ website builder to customize your layouts. You cannot do that with any WYSIWYG. And it's not just this site... there are lots of web products that allow you to customize your look and feel by overwriting and creating your own custom CSS. Not to mention the complexity of intertwining backend code into your front end code. If you don't know CSS and HTML that well... that can be disastrous.
In conclusion, I would like to say that using a WYSIWYG editor or ‘hand-coding' depends upon the individual/company. There are lots of McDonald's restaurants out there and lots of people who like McDonalds. But there are plenty of people who like an omelet made with cheese, peppers, mushrooms, bacon, and some Tabasco - cooked a little runny, with some homemade jelly and toast on the side!
Here at doodlekit™, we make breakfast from scratch!
