Probably a stupid question. I only know c++ and not very familiar with webprogramming. Let say I want to use two different freelancers to build a community site, one designer and one programmer. Wich one should do his job first? If the designer should start, would he "design" the textfields, drop down boxes, textareas etc? I mean don´t they get their look from the system, if you know what I mean? A textfield is a textfield.. Explain it like I was 10 years old Help me out!
Generall, I'd say "go for the graphics first!" but since you'll be building a community site from scratch then you might want to start with the coding part instead. You need to know how your site would work first. That's what I would do.
I say this all the time in school lol And, the design should be done first. As thats what you want the website to look like. And the coders, needs the design to code the site. But if you are talking about php, asp.net, type stuff like cms not XHTML/CSS, I would go with the programmer. Because you want to know want features you'll have in the site, before it is designed.
I always design first, then code towards it. Saves a lot of work, time and trouble to visualize the interface before you start coding it.
Hmm, ok. So if I got you right this is what you think: Simple html/css site = design first. Csm/php site with a lot of features = coding first. Is that correct?
1) what are the feature you want to have in your website >> decide and consult any developer or designer but dont start coding. 2) Layout design >> once feature requirement is done go for designing 3) website development >> design is frozen now you can slice the layout and work on coding 4) testing >> you can do it urself if your required feature for the site is working properly.
Ok. So I should list all features in like a text file description - send that to the designer - then send the design to the programmer? Hell, seems like I get different answers or I´m just stupid. I mean during the coding process there will probably be somethings that the coder says "you forgot this feature, this has to be here too". Then the design is not design for that feature.. And second, should the person designing the .psd also draw the textfields, textareas as well? For example if i need a nice contact form.
The designer would design the layout first in photoshop/fireworks or another graphics program. The image is them optimized and spliced by web programmer.
in your case your better off doing the core which is the back-end coding first. once you have all the features coded then design around it.
I think if you know c++ everything else will be easy, Java, php, etc. PHP uses standard calls for string manipulation that will be familar to c++ users. You should have no problem learning web languages. I often say when I am developing using php-- "I can't believe they let you get away with that"-- as related to php functionality. Q...
i would say learn programming first.. i don't know about the market in your country, but in mine, programmers are higher paid then designer.
Think this is personal preference. Some will say design comes first, others will say the coding. Chicken/Egg.... Wireframes, essentially a skeleton view of the site helps bridge the gap. I would say a mix is best. By this I mean, the designer comes up with a rough idea of the site's overall look. The programmer for the back end should be aware of the mockups. From those, he/she would offer input about specific issues with the programming. Then the designer takes those suggestions and produces final proofs while the programmer does their job. Also think the designer should get their say on positioning of page elements before the HTML/CSS coder does their job, designers are much more likely to want a change of location of an object. Whereas the coder probably isn't concerned with pixel perfect placement.
My advice is: don't worry too much about graphical design -- be a Web author and produce entire pages yourself! You can compose, add or modify graphical design elements anytime to suit your preferences and needs. In general it is the clarity, quality and usefulness of the content and the ease of navigation through it that are of the greatest importance to most users, who usually don't pay much attention to graphical design and programming wizardry anyway -- they want pages to display quickly and present the information they are seeking in a straightforward manner. James
Not at all. It's something few coders really get, and even fewer designers. Neither. The first job belongs to the project manager and the information architect. Their job is to gather every bit about the site. With this info, a site structure can be designed, and the relationships between pages, and groups of pages can be determined. Questions about navigation can be resolved. Each and every page will be described in terms of the content it will contain, and the structure of that content drawn up. The page layouts are also determined at this time. Notice that layout is not a graphic design issue, it is an information architectural issue—how to best present information. For example, you don't implement a drop down menu because it is cool, but because it is the best way to navigate that particular site or sub-site. Once the project specifications are set, the technical specification document is next. The programmer and html/css coder will be heavily involved in setting the technical specs, eg. will a ready-made cms, forum or wiki, e-commerce modules, etc. be used, and which one(s), or will it be made-to-order? What are the server requirements? Which mid-tier language? Which back end database? At this point, the programmer can begin writing/modifying the mid-tier and front end scripts. (You may need a database architect to design the backend db schemata and write efficient queries.) Once the client (you?) start delivering content, the html/css coder can begin implementing the pages based on the architect's structures. The graphic designer's job is the last. She has two jobs. One is to create the graphics, select colors and select typographic elements. This is for branding the site and sub-sites, and for creating a pleasant visual experience for the visitor. The second job is to create affordance. That's making the purpose of each element in the document blindingly obvious. Notice that layout is not within the graphic designer's purview; that's an information architect's responsibility. To the extent the graphic designer has enhanced the visitor's experience, she has succeeded. To the extent she has made the page/site confusing, slow or painful to use, she has failed. While the coders and graphic designers don't get down to business 'til half way through the total process, they should be involved from the start. They should have input as the specifications are drawn up so that: 1) they have a buy-in on the decisions and the reasons for them, and 2) to point out decisions that could cause problems for their jobs, and offer alternatives. Maybe not for a ten-year-old, but fairly basic. In a nutshell, though, the graphic designer is unnecessary until the structure is determined. I'd always bring the programmer/coder on board first. cheers, gary
I say do graphics -> programming -> graphics because you can't get everything done in 2 huge chunks, you have to split the work, or write a lot of documentation (or pseudocode) for the programmer.
Well you work out your layout then code it then put your graphics in. Thats the way I have always done ti.
Thanks guys. Really nice of you to answer. Thumbs up to Gary for his long post. Hehe, seems like the answer for this question depends on who you ask. Had no idea that there different views on this. At first I told the coder to start - he said "the designer should start". Ok, so I told the designer to start - he said "yes, of course, designers always starts". I sent him the description etc and then he told me to let the coder start . It´s a mess. And even though you gave me good answers I think I have to learn this by doing some errors. I´m gonna force the coder start - tell him to do the coding and only minimal "design" (just put textboxes etc in the right place on a simple html page). Then send it to the designer - then the design back to the coder. Hopefully that works. Again, thanks.
I'd always design first. But you need to know exactly what the site is to do in the first place to start a design. I usually stick to the ADITDEM process (occsionally leaving out a few steps such as documentation and evaluation), the whole process is an iterative process (you go back to previous stages to revise designs, coding, etc if there is a problem): Analysis Design Implementation Testing Documentation Evaluation Maintenance