What do you think of the way this menu works?

ok while all of you have been bitching, i've been fixing the many-script-tags issue i just plugged in my old concatenation scripts, gzipped and all.

net-result: load time dropped to 5 seconds, 800kb scripts instead of nearly 2mb..

and i'll update the outdated warning about slow load times too

 

Great, now instead of a spinning wheel and not loading, it automatically makes firefox pop up the "not responding" error meaning the script isn't releasing execution in time for FF to even allow it to run!

Though as always script compression -- how to sweep deep rooted code issues under the rug and then pretend everything is "ok".

It is faster now, you got it down to a whole whopping 41 seconds :/ not exactly a surprise when it's now BIGGER (13 megabytes?!?) but less total files (157)

Though it's great watching that background image get squished off-aspect with the developer console open. Lemme guess, calculating the size of a image tag instead of just setting a background-image on an element and using background-size:cover; ?

 

Still took 14 seconds to loads on Chrome and wouldn't load at all on FireFox. You really need to start over. and for the love of god you don't need 21 ads in a poorly scrolling panel.

Just looking at the layout I am so incredibly confused as to why you need 800 KB of scripts...... wtf??! The actual layout is simple. You can make this site immediately load and navigate better by doing things completely different!

 

Digging into the menu in the ONE browser that the menu actually works in (Opera 12 -- a laugh since nothing else on the page works there, unlike Chrome where everything else appears, but the menu is banjaxed) there's some interface loading nonsense that appears to be "pageloads are evil" web crapplication nonsense; the type of "let's throw more code at it to make it faster" delusional weirdness that wouldn't be an issue if one just used semantic markup and separation of presentation from content in the first place.

Not ALL the JS is unneccessary, but what JS actually does things (like the YT search) doesn't warrant more than ten to twenty lines of JS each letting CSS do the heavy lifting; but really MOST of it doesn't need scripting at all. Like that background swap, like the crappy fixed measurement aPo layout garbage that has no business on websites until everyone is using the same size and resolution displays (which is to say NEVER)... hell with a bit of creativity and CSS 3 I could even do that youtube search thing WITHOUT JS. (well, except you might want it to RUN the search, but popping up the dialogue? Not so much)

 

Here's evidence you don't know what you're talking about. That sprite image, can hold multiple frames per state. The fact menu_005 uses only 1 frame is to demonstrate a button can be made in 50k - 100k, whereas video can run between 2mb and 3mb per button theme. Not that that's a problem anymore with imgup.net, but I've yet to make video buttons small enough to load properly on my cheap acer liquid z3 smartphone.

Try Chrome.

You don't think i'm gonna waste all my time making each and every update work in every browser out there do you?

 

ROFL! LOL! LOL! LOL!

No who ever build websites to be cross browser compatible. Thats for dumbasses.

I got it to load in Internet Explorer after about 1 minute.

Whats with the Techno Music? Its a picture of a tavern at night. The music does not fit the scene at all unless your eating extacy!

 

And so you know, what your doing has been done before, You are certainly not the first to try to make a fake world for users to navigate. But this is certainly a failed attempt. Site would be much better without all the crap going on.

 

No.........we would just expect it to be marginally acceptable in all the major browsers............

 

Well i'd be completely stuck if i'd have to focus on browser compatibility all the time.

"fake world"??? nothing that fancy dude. i'm only trying to artify the web, not create virtual worlds..

 

My suggestion would be to create a working website first. Simple, plain HTML and CSS for all the different content-areas and such.
Then you add to that with javascript. Right now, there are so many things on that page that doesn't work, and as far as I can see, it takes way too long to fix what's not working (a website with bugs (ie, in development) shouldn't take more than an hour, max, to fix a specific bug - and now I'm being generous).
A basic start, with added functionality, will also make it possible to add more efficient ways to code specific functionality - instead of basing everything on a javascript-framework of sorts (homemade, as far as I can understand) - you can concentrate on minimizing the javascript-code, so as to make everything work faster.
Inline styling and attached javascript is very rarely needed - at least hardcoded inline-styling. Class-changes are more effective, but involves a bigger stylesheet (usually).

 

I came to the same conclusion, to make a working website first, then debug for browser compatibility, if still necessary at that time (because even IE is getting more standards compliant, thank God).
Contrary to your reports, in Chrome and Safari, most features work (except for the background youtube search i think, seductivapps.com/search, which is broken pending the creation of a youtube playlist editor+player), and that's all I can offer the public at this time. If IE breaks, i'm not gonna waste my time fixing it time and time again while microsoft could be more standards compliant / plain sane, and fix the problem that way without me having to spend futile time on it (you'll never get it fixed in IE sometimes, sometimes you can only properly diagnose the problem with specially-for-the-occasion-built browser test scripts and report that to microsoft or another browser company), or other programmers who push the browser "to it's limits" for that matter.

But to say debugging a certain bug should take no longer than this or that, is complete nonsense, sorry. Sometimes you got whole families of bugs that are hard to evict and present only 1 little problem in a piece of code (my menu was like that until a day ago). So it takes as long as it takes, and each bug is different. vastly different.

 

As long as you yourself has built all the code (except for libraries utilized), it shouldn't be possible to introduce bugs that should take days or weeks to solve. Of course, there are different severities - if something isn't aligned on a specific page, or a sidebar goes under the content at a given resolution - these are minor bugs, and easily fixed. If there's a bug in data-reporting, updating or adding, there might be a little bit more work involved, but again, it shouldn't take much time.
I recently decided to change the main classes of a project I'm working on, and it took about 5-6 hours all together, assigning new variables and rebuilding some queries and such - that was included testing and rewriting the actual classes. Also a menu-redesign - which took about 1 hour total.
My point is that there is no reason for a page to be more complex than need be - and the simpler you can make something, the easier it is to debug any errors. If the code is complex, of course it'll take more time, but again, even with the functionality you're pushing, the page itself should be one or maybe two pages, the menu could be a function or a class, and then you can add javascript to get the more complex fancy stuff working.

 

You don't. But your site has to load in the worlds most popular browser Lol

 

Your site does some cool things. However, it's done in a way to negatively affect the accessibility and viewers experience. When I loaded a video background I thought that was super cool. However, I had a tough time viewing certain text and the video lagged my system. Now I'm not on the craziest system but my specs are greater than your average internet user.

Unlike a lot of other tech users here I am all for artsy creative web sites but only if it enhances the viewers experience. Your site doesn't accomplish that. You're trying to do too much and you are all over the place. It confuses the viewers. And I'll repeat myself...it really is a POOR navigation system not just b ecause I don't care for it but because I find it hard to do simple things like find your content and click on buttons.

 

I've turned on the video fragments feature of the menu..

Thanks..

I'm not saying my site is perfect. A lot of things could be better, but are postponed to fix until I have more features on the site that can be used by returning visitors.

I'm not going to support IE. IE is a mess, even in windows 8.

Actually it is very possible to introduce new bugs. Adding new features always does, complicated bugs at that, for which really no deadline should or can be given.

I agree if you keep things simple as some of you do, bugs are easier to solve as well. Try it when you're pushing the browser to the max, and you'll find fix times to increase.

 

Your site will not load in FireFox.... So you won't support IE or FireFox..............................

 

I think the issue may be that the OP was born in the mid to late 90's. Maybe never seen the old look of websites.

This site wont load for me in FF or IE. After 5 minutes I got it to load in chrome.


I decided to reduce the browser size and see what happened. Well the ads disappear, and then a gear icon appears on the top right.

So you click the gear, and a popup comes over with Backgrouds to choose from. AND IT WILL NOT GO AWAY!

SO I reload this terrible website just to further point out its flaws.

You also have a view button, under that, you can change the background. When you do so, you have a YouTube clip playing in the background. And the youtube video shows a Google Ad.

Now I may be incorrect but I believe that that is against the Adsense TOS

Also now that a youtube video is playing in the background that you cannot really see due to all the overlaying content. If you mouseover it the stupid time tracking bar shows at the bottom of the website. And if you try, you can actually click it and adjust the videos position.

I refuse to load this site in my browser again, good luck with this.

 

NetStar, i'm in the middle of development of new features and cleanup of the startup routine, so it's a bit of a waste of time to do browser compatibility fixing atm. I'll look into compatibility issues perhaps a little later this week. When I've upgraded the menu one final step, I'll do compatibility fixing ok. I'll let you all know when that's done.

KangBroke, I have log entries that list up to 50 seconds of initial load time, from all around the world. For now, that'll have to do.
And might I say you turn small issues not into polite bugreports, but a complete rant and heavy insult, which I don't tolerate. So feel free not to check my site again, I can use some more politely worded feedback than what you're offering.

From my todo-list (some issues, also the ones reported on this forum, will get fixed without ever entering my todo list):

- Build a youtube playlist editor for seductiveapps. one where you can search youtube (already got the code for it) and stick found items in a playlist, then re-order them. should work on the playlists tied to a youtube account, so will have to use the youtube api (more).

• #siteVideo's menu is to span 2 lines of menu, that means vividMenu needs an upgrade in initMenu and makeLevelsFitInContainerSpace (horizontal levels going out of bounds fix)
• add an item to the root of the #musicMenu in #siteVideo with label="Search". pressing it selects it and brings up the #siteVideoSearch dialog. Pressing a selected "Search" item brings back whatever dialog (none, #productDetails or #siteComments atm) was shown in it's place before that.
• something needs to be done about bringing up dialogs and then restoring previous dialogs visibility (like a back-button, really)
• where to put "create new playlist?" --> in #siteVideoSearch.
• the youtube playlist *editor* is to be in #siteContent.
  • has a grid of thumbnails instead of lines of titles (like youtube itself does for it's playlist editor)
  • drag and drop re-ordering of thumbnail images
  • press save button to save to youtube playlist database at youtube.com
• playlists should ideally be organized into a tree menu, for inclusion in #siteVideo
• build a tree-datastructure editor (apps/user/appContent/agenda.content.php has a treeview component, i will start with that)

#siteVideo, the youtube video player on this site, has a menu, and menus are always menu items in a treestructure.
I want to enable people to use this site to edit and compose youtube playlists with more ease than on the main youtube site.

This means I should invest the time to create a tree editor component for seductiveapps, so that people and site administrators can set the #siteVideo menu with ease to specific sets of youtube playlists, taken from and edited in the main JSON database connected to a site running seductiveapps, and stored in the groups, user, and main settings areas/paths of the site...

The menu also needs more work. Now that levels of menu items are properly hidden and re-shown (sa.menu.startWalkback()), it's time to focus on what should happen if any given level of menu-items (you enter a new level of menu items as you open a submenu) doesn't fit in the parent DIV space, or not where the opening menu item would paint a menu that just cascades a little down and to the right of the parent item.

The solution is to paint menu items in the largest space available relative to the opening menu item, a fairly easy calculation. To cut a long story short, the hard part is bubbling data around the framework like how much extra space is required in a parent div to paint all the menu items from the first level of the menu. As you load a new menu into any place on the screen, there might be or not be enough space, and thus that parent div should resize itself on queue of the menu being reloaded with new items.

The framework is ready for DIVs to be resized on queue of events in the use of the framework (the JSON viewer under Apps&Games does this), but the menu and the datastructure used by the menu need more work before it can do the same to dialogs.

The tree editor will be set up like windows file explorer or finder on the mac. A treeview to the left, a content-of-selected-tree-node pane to the right of that, and the ability to make the tree wider and the content smaller or vice-versa.

Since the menus are to be stored in the main TreeDB JSON database, and no longer as JSON files on the filesystem of the server, the tree editor is going to work on specific nodes from the main treeDB which have a specific .saObjectType set (for instance saObjectType == "youtubePlaylistCollections") and all the nodes underneath those initial nodes (listed in that end-user view of the tree in the treeeditor as under the "path" used for those nodes in the main DB btw).

The treeeditor will be polymorphic enough to edit trees of other types of items than youtube playlists, making it a sort of silver bullet for the entire framework.

I'm going to take my time on this one, the thing should work on large trees as well.

 

At the risk of being out of line....it makes zero sense to me to have a To Do list with this site. The entire concept, layout and structure is flawed. Try creating a site that ISN'T flawed then have a To Do list to tweak it to perfection. Your site doesn't need minor updates it needs a major overhaul.

You come across like a complete jackass. You seem to think nothing is wrong with your web site when you are having MAJOR accessibility issues.

It doesn't load in FireFox at ALL. You aren't supporting IE at all. The load time on Chrome is anywheres from 15 seconds all the way up to 2mins+. Your navigation menu is difficult to read and doesn't function in a practical way people understand. And your site is full of 800KB+ JavaScript routines that over work simple concepts and eats up CPU. You have 20+ image ads scrolling in a small panel. Your site is about your generic Apps & Games yet it seems to be a showcase for your coding ability (or lack of). You have major issues here. Stop with the To Do list and please redesign your entire site so your audience can actually view your site....and know what it's about without asking!

 

I've had enough of your shit dude. I've designed this system to work fine with screenreaders for instance. Exactly by all that scriptery that enhances limited visual markup in the initial PHP-delivered HTML (reserving that for text content and links that mean something to screenreaders and searchengine crawlers) that you people keep attacking.

You fail to see that I'm trying to explain that i'm in the middle of major upgrades and cleanup of the startup routines (and yes, menu still too), and whenever I fix something you complain about, you bitch equally jerk-like about something new. But.. : I have a thicker hide than you or I thought, because I see you and your "its totally flawed"-attitude as completely irrelevant to my fairly big plans for my code. So please check the working copy URL in about 3 days to a week, and get back to me on what still sucks ok

Anyway, for the readers that might be interested in where I'm heading with the current working copy at http://seductiveapps.com/youtubePlaylistEditor/, see http://seductiveapps.com/todo.txt (which is my working copy of my todolist)..