Navagaition Help

irishgeo

hi again
i need help with navaigation around my site. i need a good idea to implement. I have tried frames and go to naviagtion which have not worked. I need something that is easy to setup use and update. Some links to sites which use it would be good.
thanks guys. I look forward to showing some of my work soon.

Baz_

like the drop down menus up above you mean, try dhtmlcentral.com and you might get some ideas there, cool menus.

b20uvkft6m5xwg

www.dhtmlcentral.com
I endorse that product wholey

**Frames Fan Speaking**

They are the easiest and best IMO- but I'm just biased


**/End Frames Fan Speaking**

yellum

Frames ? You just had to highlight their existence. Don't mention the War !!!

jbkenn

You could also have a look here

http://freesitetemplates.com/generators.html

jbkenn

damnyanks

Or you could make the nav bar a include file and use it through out your site!

beaver

Or you could make the nav bar a include file and use it through out your site!

Which means you'll get links to the page you're actually already on. Yuk. A pet peev of mine.

beaver

Kevin,

Could you describe the site map a bit - we'll be able to recommend a navigation system better if we know the kinda infrastructure involved...

Baz_

Beaver: Unfortunately when a site reaches a certain size it is hard to avoid using damnyanks method, I mean you're using the boards now and its not HUGE but still you have a link to the page you're on. I don't know why it annoys you its a very good and user friendly way of navigating ie. on every page the user does not have to learn a new navigation system (a pet peeve of mine) and it also promotes code reuse (coming from a software development background thats completely the opposite of a pet peeve of mine). So what I am trying to say is that code reuse is good mkay.

beaver

Baz_,

I think maybe you misunderstood me.

Yes, if the site is a very large one, then yes, it makes sense to do things damnyanks way - no question.

However, my peev isn't having the same navigation system on every page; not at all. It's linking to the page you're currently on. To me, it makes no sense - it's like standing in your house saying I want to go home.

Having said that, it's necessary on large sites.

irishgeo

thanks for the help guys. i have checked on the site mention earlier i think its what i am looking for. i have not done a site map yet. i hope to get the naviagtion right first. i had problems with that before.

i look forward to a long association to this group.:cool:

b20uvkft6m5xwg

**Flame Proof Boiler suit ON**

Whats wrong with frames??
If you do them right they are tops for ease of updating etc. If I were you I'd explore some Frames Tutuorials before anything else.
Frames got a bit of a bad rep when they came in first because not everybody had a frames enabled browser, but now 99% of the world can read frames!
[No plug Intended] If you look at this new site that I have finished http://coma.stauntonline.com , you'll see how effective they can be, especially for future updating and modification. Sure certain JS menu's work fine as well, but I think Frames add a certain neatness to affairs:)

It is after all a matter of preference, but dont give up on frames because you think they're difficult or didn't work first time. If thats the case anybody here will have no prob. writing a bit of code for ya:)

gluck

**Flame Proof Boiler suit OFF**

Static

Ah, frames. They are good for some things, bad for others.

Frames got a bad rep because they bite the big one.

"but now 99% of the world can read frames! "

Not if they use text based browsers. Not if they use older browser. I'm not saying to get stuck in the olden days, but if your site is going to be technical/programming/development, then be prepared to have text based browser visitors. Eg, when I fetch apache from a remote machine over an SSH session, it's much easier to lynx/w3m to the machine and get it there.

That aside. The BIG reason frames bit the big one, is the one thing they were apparently 'ideal' for - navigation. Sure, it's great to stick some links in the side and have them available no matter what page, or where on the page you were. The problem is bookmarking, and history navigation. If you're on a site with many pages, and you've been there for a while, and realise 'oh yeah, I want to go back to X', so you click your history, and everything shows up as the <title> tag of your main frame. That is _incredibly_ annoying.

Secondly, bookmarking. Bookmark a page, and you're actually bookmarking the frame. Very often if I want to go to someone 'hey, look at this', instead of copying and pasting the url from the location window, I have to go to the frame and do a 'copy link location' or similar. It's a pain. A major pane (pun).

Frames suck. Avoid them. There's a _few_ excuses to get away with them, and you'll notice that a lot of big sites avoid them. Why? Because there are better methods of navigation. A well planned, well organised, and well structured site should intuitively(sp) tell a user where to go to find something, without you ramming a frame full of links in their face.

*calms down*

DS

Agreed, frames are pants.

Originally posted by 80project
If you do them right they are tops for ease of updating etc.

Heard of dynamic web development?

b20uvkft6m5xwg

What happenned to my FlameProof Boiler Suit ???
I'm burning up HAAAHHH.

For large sites, frames are unworkable- there are too many layers otherwise and as pointed out it can be impossible to accurately bookmark things not to mention a few other things but for smaller projects they work perfectly. Especailly if your are adverse to having to scroll to much as I am

It is after all a matter of preference

I didn't dismiss other dymanic content options but do stand by the above statement:)

Static

I'm just saying, from all the discussions I've ever read about frames (and I've read a lot) the general consensus is that they're really evil. But as you said, it's your choice. People don't have to view your site 8)


*holsters flame-proof-suit-defeating fire hose*