1 Page Simple Site, Confusing Navigation, You Won't Figure It Out

So I know this guy built his site and it's not dynamically changing or reading the current state of what is being shown on the viewable screen.

Which some of you might think, but it's not.

http://www.danielspatzek.com/

I am just so confused about one simple thing, and its the navigation and the triggers.


for example, on the CONTACT page, how does the PROJECTS link know to push the CONTACT page to the right?

And even on the ABOUT page, how does the PROJECTS link know to push the ABOUT page to the left?

It's the same PROJECTS link I checked your site out, it's the exact same PROJECTS link.

I have been trying to figure this out for hours now and I'm stuck

Thanks so much for the help, it would cure my curiosity alot

 

Hi there phaze3131,

the site to which you linked looks pretty crappy to my old eyes....




Perhaps, if I turn javascript on it may look different.

Call me old fashioned but I prefer a site to be functional without it.

​

coothead

 

LOL good point, and yea the main page on his site uses js to do the tilting effect of the image.​

 

I'm pretty familiar with how most of that could be done... but I sure as shine-ola would NEVER do that, and if I met a developer who did that I'd probably end up introducing their proboscis to my metacarpals with significant force.

WHY you ask? Simple, the site is a GIANT MIDDLE FINGER to users. Inaccessible train wreck reaking so badly of "WCAG, what's that" and art faygelah BS, it should be disembowled, drawn and quartered, hanged, stabbed and burned at the stake. Artsy scripttard nonsense like that, mated to pointless bandwidth wasting images, little if any content of value, design concepts that flat out will fight you every inch of the way on making it accessible, is such a train wreck of developer ineptitude that whoever made that site needs to do the world a favor and go flip burgers for a living; they clearly lack the aptitude to make websites that actually care about users.

Of course I assume that a developer is a mouth-breathing halfwit the moment I see code like this:

<div class="contact_homeitem_wrapper"><a class="contact_homeitem" href="/#" data-ix="contact-home">HOME</a>

Code (markup):

Or this:

<div class="megawrapper">
            <div class="w-section home-page">
                <div class="home_logo" style="pointer-events:none;"></div>
                <div class="home_centralarea" data-ix="home-darkfield">
                    <div class="home_parallaxpic_wrapper">
                        <div class="home_parallaxpic" data-ix="home-parallaxpic">

Code (markup):

Or even something as simple as this:

        <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="themes/Theme/css/normalize.css">
        <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="themes/Theme/css/webflow.css">
        <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="themes/Theme/css/dnlsptzk.webflow.css">

Code (markup):

Oh, who are we kidding, I assume I'm dealing with a drooling moron when I see this in a codebase:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.11.1/jquery.min.js"></script>

Code (markup):

Of course the real laugh is, if I gave a shit about IE9 and earlier users, I could probably implement that these days WITHOUT the scripttardery. Hell, I could probably even make a passable attempt at making it gracefully degrade to pre CSS3 browsers.

NOT that I would EVER deploy a site like that... but I COULD probably make it work much like it does now just using HTML and CSS in modern browsers, WITH a fallback plan for older ones. Said fallback plan might even be better suited to mobile friendly to boot! That way you send the dumbass re-re dipshit "barely screen media viable" artsy fixed height design rubbish to desktop users only... then you're only giving a middle finger to a fraction of a percent instead of 15 to 30%.

 

Being a search expert, whether the website is dynamic or static, the user experience should always be considered as 1st priority. Because ultimately that will bring in more conversions for your business.

 

Precisely what Matt Cutts told us a little over a decade ago: "Write for the visitor, not the search engine!"

You make it useful and accessible to users, have content of value people want and get that content to the user as fast as possible without any goofy tricks -- that's the recipe for success. Goofy scripted visuals and massive space wasters presenting zero content to the visitor by default? That's just begging to fail HARD.

 

Took 6-7 seconds for the thing to show up on my laptop. On my cell phone... I didn't have time to wait. S-L-O-W. Not good for a simple one page site.

 

If anyone dug around a bit, on the guys 'about' page he says how he used www. webflow .com to build this, so the guy likely had no idea how to program in the slightest bit. This webflow thing reminds me of the Angelfire/Geocities days.

 

Totally agree! The topics or content which are in discussion and can pass value tot he readers helping them in making a decision is what Google looks for. In the future even i predict that the content which gets the more engagement will go up in SERPs too. Its my assumption though.