mirror of
https://git.sr.ht/~seirdy/seirdy.one
synced 2024-11-23 21:02:09 +00:00
Reference other article, phrasing, fix double id
This commit is contained in:
parent
b5ebca64cd
commit
e4b5d59520
2 changed files with 9 additions and 3 deletions
|
@ -776,7 +776,7 @@ Too much lossy SVG compression can sometimes *reduce* the effectiveness of gzip
|
|||
|
||||
This is possibly the most subjective item I'm including, and the item with the most exceptions. Consider it more of a weak suggestion than hard advice. Use your own judgement.
|
||||
|
||||
The first or second heading in the DOM, and the highest heading level, should be the page title marking the start of your main content (i.e. it should come after the site title, site navigation links, etc). Only if this is impossible should you consider adding a "skip link" instead. Visually-impaired users generally prefer navigating by headings.
|
||||
The first or second heading in the DOM, and the highest heading level, should be the page title marking the start of your main content (i.e. it should come after the site title, site navigation links, etc). If this is impossible, consider adding a "skip link" instead. Visually-impaired users generally prefer navigating by headings, but screen reader beginners still benefit from a skip-link.
|
||||
|
||||
A simple layout looks good at a variety of window sizes, rendering responsive layout changes unnecessary. Textual websites really don't need more than a single column; readers should be able to scan a page top-to-bottom, left-to-right (or right-to-left, depending on the locale) exactly once to read all its content. Verify this using the horizontal-line test: mentally draw a horizontal line across your page, and make sure it doesn't intersect more than one (1) item. Keeping a single-column layout that doesn't require responsive layout changes ensures smooth window re-sizing.
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -1205,6 +1205,10 @@ I'll be adding more tips here shortly; watch this space.
|
|||
|
||||
If your site is simple enough, it should automatically handle the vast majority of edge-cases. Different devices and browsers all have their quirks, but they generally have one thing in common: they understand POSH.
|
||||
|
||||
No matter how simple a page is, I don't think simplicity eliminates the need for testing. I outlined the need to analyze actual run-time behavior in another post exploring how code alone doesn't give the full picture:
|
||||
|
||||
=> gemini://seirdy.one/2022/02/02/floss-security.gmi The right thing for the wrong reasons: FLOSS doesn't imply security
|
||||
|
||||
In addition to standard testing, I recommend testing with unorthodox setups that are unlikely to be found in the wild. If a website doesn't work well in one of these tests, there's a good chance that it uses an advanced Web feature that can serve as a point of failure in other cases. Simple sites should be able to look good in a variety of situations out of the box.
|
||||
|
||||
Your page should easily pass the harshest of tests without any extra effort if its HTML meets basic standards for well-written code (overlooking bad formatting and a lack of comments). Even if you use a complex static site generator, the final HTML should be simple, readable, and semantic.
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -645,7 +645,7 @@ Color schemes should also look good to users who apply gamma adjustments. Most o
|
|||
In defense of link under­lines {#in-defense-of-link-underlines}
|
||||
----------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Some typographers insist that [underlined on-screen text is obsolete](https://practicaltypography.com/underlining.html),[^10] and hyperlinks are no exception. I disagree.
|
||||
Some typographers insist that [underlined on-screen text is obsolete](https://practicaltypography.com/underlining.html), and hyperlinks are no exception. I disagree.
|
||||
|
||||
One reason is that underlines make it easy to separate multiple consecutive inline links:
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -780,7 +780,7 @@ Layout
|
|||
|
||||
This is possibly the most subjective item I'm including, and the item with the most exceptions. Consider it more of a weak suggestion than hard advice. Use your own judgement.
|
||||
|
||||
The first or second heading in the DOM, and the highest heading level, should be the page title marking the start of your main content (i.e. it should come after the site title, site navigation links, etc). Only if this is impossible should you consider adding a "skip link" instead. Visually-impaired users generally prefer navigating by headings.
|
||||
The first or second heading in the DOM, and the highest heading level, should be the page title marking the start of your main content (i.e. it should come after the site title, site navigation links, etc). If this is impossible, consider adding a "skip link" instead. Visually-impaired users generally prefer navigating by headings, but screen reader beginners still benefit from a skip-link.
|
||||
|
||||
A simple layout looks good at a variety of window sizes, rendering responsive layout changes unnecessary. Textual websites really don't need more than a single column; readers should be able to scan a page top-to-bottom, left-to-right (or right-to-left, depending on the locale) exactly once to read all its content. Verify this using the horizontal-line test: mentally draw a horizontal line across your page, and make sure it doesn't intersect more than one (1) item. Keeping a single-column layout that doesn't require responsive layout changes ensures smooth window re-sizing.
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -1186,6 +1186,8 @@ Testing
|
|||
|
||||
If your site is simple enough, it should automatically handle the vast majority of edge-cases. Different devices and browsers all have their quirks, but they generally have one thing in common: they understand <abbr title="Plain-Old, Semantic HTML">POSH</abbr>.
|
||||
|
||||
No matter how simple a page is, I don't think simplicity eliminates the need for testing. I outlined the need to analyze actual run-time behavior in [another post exploring how code alone doesn't give the full picture](https://seirdy.one/2022/02/02/floss-security.html).
|
||||
|
||||
In addition to standard testing, I recommend testing with unorthodox setups that are unlikely to be found in the wild. If a website doesn't work well in one of these tests, there's a good chance that it uses an advanced Web feature that can serve as a point of failure in other cases. Simple sites should be able to look good in a variety of situations out of the box.
|
||||
|
||||
Your page should easily pass the harshest of tests without any extra effort if its HTML meets basic standards for well-written code (overlooking bad formatting and a lack of comments). Even if you use a complex static site generator, the final HTML should be simple, readable, and semantic.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue