Webmaster Forum / HTML, CSS, Scripts / CSS / August 2005

You have 3 sections (as you said), a header, a footer, and a scrolling main
content section.

This is easily achieved using 3 divs: a header, a footer, and a scrolling
main content section!

You'll end up with 2 scrollbars, but if you can live with that (or if
someone can tell you how to hide the scroll bars for the page), it'll do
just what you want.

Bob,

Your bottom frame contains functions to complete the sale.  I think
most buyters will be used to seeing that information at or near the
top. Look at other shopping sites and you'll see that checkout and
shopping cart are always at the top.

If you still need a footer with some other information, just put it
after the long ordering section--it won't be visible until the user
scrolls to the bottom, but people are used to that.

On my web sites I use a single html file for the footer and have it
repeated on the bottom of each page by inserting them via SSI.

Charlie
http://FlyingSam.com

Nowt happens here due to this stupidity: <a href="javascript:subFrm()">
don't use javascript for anything essential.

Get rid of it also.

Stop wanting that.

I agree with the idea of splitting the page up with divs, and also putting
shopping links at the top instead of the bottom.  I think that's a good way
to do it.

What I would suggest you do is to visit another site that performs a similar
function to yours and emulate that if it seems to work well.  Try
[pizzahut.com] and [papajohns.com] for pizza ordering ideas.

There is something to be said about being original, but when it comes to
customer interaction, consistency is the key for everyone to be able to
easily use your system.  That's why every brick and mortor store has cattle
lanes to checkout through.  There may be better ways to do it (I've seen
Best Buy try a different aproach in some stores that seems to work well
during holiday rushes), and there are definately more creative ways, but in
the end you go with the norm to avoid confusion.

I don't agree with eliminating JS all together like Spartanicus suggested -
although I wouldn't rely on it.  Using a normal A tag with a JS resize would
be fine, but don't require JS to open the window.  Just in case JS is
disabled you page still needs to function - even if it doesn't look
perfect - it should still 'work'.  But c'mon with the right-click
copyright... that's really a joke.  Anyone who would want to look at your
code (namely those trying to help you right now) knows enough that the JS
right-click protection isn't protection at all and if they aren't smart
enough to get around that, then they aren't smart enough to need protecting
against.

Lastly, I personally wouldn't visit your page ever again if I was a
customer, and if I was purchasing something, I'd cancel the purchase and
leave... why?  Because you forced the window to max and that's quite rude.
I run a rather high resolution and a max window is REDICOULOUSLY big for me.
No, not everyone is like me, but forcing a windows resize is just plain
rude, period.

I personally don't believe a developer should do anything to alter the
user's default window size unless it's a picture popup type of situation and
you want a smaller window so not to waste space.  But opening a new window
of a certain size is more acceptable vs a forced max.

Honestly though, if a user goes to your page and it doesn't fit, don't you
think they'll max the window or resize it themselves?  Besides, you
shouldn't make a page that relies on being a certain size anyway... that's
one of those 'best practices' that we all need to get better at.  What if
the user is for some aweful reson running 640x480?  The site should still
'work' even if it doesn't look as you intended.

A side note about your force max - you've used a resize to a certain size
method combined with not allowing the user to resize the window.  What this
did to me was max the window, but since that pisses me off, I double-clicked
on the window's title bar and it restored to my normal browser size.  From
there though, I didn't have any more control over the window size.  Just a
glitch I thought I'd pass on.

-----------
Shawn Wilson