BSI Weblog

I’ve been a developer for a long time. I was taught that efficiency and performance were of great importance. I’ve noticed a disturbing trend in software development that has been going on for quite a while now. Simply put: sloppy development. Large amounts of code are written to perform relatively simple tasks. I understand and support writing code that checks the validity of the data and that work takes extra code.

However, here is a real example I think makes my point. There is PHP code that runs this website and accounts for the vast majority of the functionality used on this and at least 6 other websites. It includes all the HTML form processing, generalized database access, parameter parsing, navigation, file manager, and CSS generation to name a few. This entire code base is 512K including common images (uncompressed). I went to a common PHP Class Library site and picked a few packages at random to compare code sizes. One such package purports to manage a certain type of data without respect to display. This one package was 640K (uncompressed).

So here we have a bit of code that supports a broad range of functionality (my code) that is smaller than a bit of code that support a single function. Don’t tell me it is because of comments. My code is well documented using a standard (Javadoc) style of documentation. The answer is simple: my approach to programming is different than the developers of the other packages.

So what? Well less code and more reuse means better performance, less to test, less to maintain, and a better final result.

We’ve been working hard on the underlying architecture of our sites for quite some time now. Finally we updated this site to that new architecture. We have been busy with other things, but had to clean up our own site after working on other client’s sites.

One of the things we haven't discussed in great length is the use of fonts on web pages. Although many people want a distinctive site with custom fonts, they can sacrifice accessability and SEO in the process if they aren't careful. There are a number of web-safe fonts that can be used. Each has a purpose and a 'look' but some are more readable than others, especially at small sizes. The following list shows each of the standard web-safe fonts.

• Arial
• Comic Sans MS
• Courier New
• Georgia
• Times New Roman
• Trebuchet
• Verdana

Of the lot, Verdana for sans serif and Georgia for serif are the most readable.

I've made some improvements in the site mostly for IE users. The site should look much better. As we tend to do, those changes have also been propagated out to most of our customers at no charge.

Gabriel was asked to provide a Mac OS X Tip for the local Highschool staff each week. We will post those tips in a new RSS feed/Blog and post the link here.

We've implemented a site search capability we can provide to our customers at no additional charge.

Due to technical difficulties, our RSS feed has been disabled for a bit. The problem has been corrected and the RSS is once again operational.

I've just completed a site redesign for the CHDS site. Converting the site to the new design took about two hours. It took that long because I decided to change the structure of the site as well as the look. Had the change been purely visual, it might have taken less than 30 minutes. The change included going from a left navigation to a top navigation. The entire header changed, most of the content on every page was repositioned, even all the colors changed. It was all done without site interruption. A total of about 10 files were actually changed, but every page was affected in significant ways. Cool, eh?

I've noticed a number of sites that are now producing valid HTML pages for their front page. While this is an improvement, unless the rest of the pages on the site validate, it is little more than wasted effort. Part of the purpose of producing valid HTML is to provide a consistent, correct bit of code to the user's browser. Another part is providing a straightforward document that webcrawlers can evaluate for web search engines. Lastly, correct HTML shows that whoever produced this page took the time to do things right. They thought it through.

So, OK, now you know that ALL the pages are supposed to validate. You've done that. You are done, right? No.

Did you proofread the copy? Is it spelled correctly? Does it make sense? Does it make your point?

On the web (any publication really) what counts most is content. If the content is bad, it makes no difference if it is pretty. Write good copy. Make your point. Be clear. Structure it so the web crawlers can find it. Frame it nicely so your audience can read it. Now you are done, right? No.

Don't forget, the web is dynamic, changing, you need to start working on the next entry, page, ad, product, whatever it may be. Tommorrow is another day.

It has been a wonderful year. I have been amazed at how much BSI has grown over our first year.

BSI is on the fast track to being one of the most reliable and most advanced website production and maintenance providers. We will continue to prove this over the next year.

I want to thank all of you who have believed in us and those who have supported us.

Please let people know about us. We will amaze them.

As always Better, Faster, and Cheaper - Choose All Three!

We now have an RSS feed. If you are lucky enough to use Safari, you will notice the RSS link when you load the main page. If you don't have Safari, you can get to the RSS feed via 'feed://www.bsidolphin.com/rss.php'.

I've updated the forms to a new look. Let us know what you think of the online forms (try getstarted for an example).

I've gone through our entire site and redefined all the fonts as symbolic sizes instead of fixed font sizes. This allows browsers to display the fonts more in line with the user's preferences.

I've been reminded again that sometimes we can't see the forest for the trees. We get so caught up in what we understand the problem to be that we can fail to see what the problem actually is.

I spent several hours attempting to fix what appeared to be a browser bug. It turned out to be nothing more than inconsistent use of case for an identifier in CSS. Once the consistency was fixed, everything worked as expected.

I hope everyone has a Wonderful Easter. It is a beautiful spring day.

The new site is now active (www.chds.us). This is a site that is transitioning from a previous implementation of the site to a new one based on web standards to create a more responsive and manageable site.

While this is not directly a BSI project, the work done by me for BSI was instrumental in explaining the BSI approach to building web sites. They saw it, they understood it, they wanted it.

If you look under the covers on that site, you'll see the same xHTML and CSS techniques we've used before. If you want more information on this, you can look at the discussion of xHTML conversions or our explanation of Web Design elsewhere on this site.

OK, been a while.

Here's a rundown of what is going on for us.

First of all, we are currently working on a project with WeWrite ( www.wewrite.net) and Ewing (www.ewing1.com). It is a choose your own ending story book. This is a big project and has been taking a good amount of our time.

Secondly, Alex is currently working with the Center for Homeland Defense and Security (www.chds.us) in Monterey. Alex went in there about three weeks ago to reimplement one piece of their site (using web standards of course) and has already done a major part of the public site. We assume the new look will be up within a week or so.

Lastly, Thomas Musical Instruments (www.thomasmusical.com) is in the process of moving to downtown Santa Cruz. They will no longer be off of Soquel Avenue. We are trying to work on a few things to help notify people of the move.

We're having fun. So far it has been an extremely good venture. I am happy to say that BSI will be 1 year old within just under 2 months.

We are still looking for jobs. If you know someone who might want a website, send them our way. We can do great things for them.

I've been building a site for a client that is intended as an information sharing site for gamers. It focuses mostly on 'mappers' and their interests. It's up now and has been submitted to the major search engines. It's been tested with a number of browsers and looks as it should in them. We always appreciate feedback, so if you notice anything wrong, let us know.

We've completed the initial design of the product-based site and are now in the clean-up mode. During this time we are looking for inconsistencies, broken links, graphics that need improvement...

We are also looking for browser rendering issues (especially older browsers) so we can at least provide a reasonable experience for those users. Soon we will be in the maintenance mode.

We are also implementing changes to improve their search standings in the major search engines.

We are currently working with a new client that is making a transition from convoluted HTML to xHTML/CSS. The website is also changing it's focus: it is moving from an unfocused to a product focused site. The change is occurring over a period of time without site disruption. (No Under Construction Signs)

One of the difficulties in working with CSS is the inconsistent behavior of IE/Mac and IE/Win. Different versions render differently. None fully adhere to the standards. But I dislike using hacks to achieve results because they are inherently fragile. I am willing to use features that operate reasonably well in all browsers.

As such, I have the correct CSS that renders the home page correctly in most browsers. If you notice any odd display, send me an email. Let me know what browser you are using and on which OS (Win version, Mac OS version, Unix). I'll look into it.

The team photos are online. We can do reprints or even print the individual photos as 8x10. We've gotten positive feedback on the delivered pictures.

If you know of any groups (or individuals for that matter) that need photos, give us a call or send an email.

We have just finished the largest photo job to date. We photographed a total of 700 people or so 3 times each. We also took team photos as well. Then we had to go through these 2000+ photos to choose the best ones. Ultimately, after hours of work, we are finally done.

Team photos will be uploaded to the website very soon, so stay tuned. Anyone who wants to get reprints must contact us so that we can get that team's individual photos uploaded. This is because we do not have individual names.

Stay tuned. We are done, but there is always follow up work to do. Contact us if you have any comments about the photos.

Just a few days ago I was chatting with a friend of mine attending college in Connecticut. He took a look at the site and made a few overall suggestions to make the site look even better. Within seconds we had changed the look and I asked him what he thought of it now. He reloaded the page and was impressed with the quick change to the whole look (not just one page).

It is fun to see how quickly and how little is needed to change the look of sites using xHTML. It is nice to manage the sites quickly and easily.

As web designers we are always trying to make things look and work better. Therefore we have once again redesigned our site. It should look better now and all of the comments we have received so far are all good. I hope you like it and I would love to hear what you think.

I continue to make changes to the site. I'd love to hear what you think of the changes. I value the opinion of others.

I am surprised by the number of people that claim that they use the greatest and newest standards. But, don't let them fool you. If they claim that they do it, test their site for validity.

We have every one of our pages validated. All but one of our customers have validated XHTML. That one customer's host adds html to every page served and we have no control over that. The XHTML that we code is all valid.

For more info contact us, or go to the validator page which will link you to the W3C standards.

I've been reorganizing the site over the last few days. If you find any broken links, please bring them to our attention.

Other than that, I've been improving some of the infrastructure elements to make things work smoother and more efficiently. One of the benefits of BSI building your website is that I migrate those improvements into your site as appropriate. This way you reap the benefits of regular improvements without even lifting a finger. How cool is that?

Since BSI is an emerging business, we can always use help from anyone that can help us secure more work. I will be establishing a "Referral program" so that you can make money by helping us.

If you refer a client and that client contact results in a job for BSI, you receive a finder's fee once the job is paid for. For example, for a website referral you might make as much as $50.

Start sending those referrals!

Things have been going quite well for this company. Now having a client in the "land down under" has made BSI into a truly international business.

It is incredible how much the internet can pull people together. People from all over the world can contact one another very quickly without costing a fortune.

Our site has been down for the last two days due to hardware problems at the hosting company. We are back now and it feels good to be back.

I just wanted to add my two cents here. I strongly believe in the web standards established by the W3C. Ignorance of the standards is no excuse to not write valid HTML. The standards have been published for some time now. I personally prefer the CSS/xHTML form (separating layout from content), but this is not the only acceptable solution.

If someone else builds your site, insist that they adhere to the standards. If they can't, maybe we should be doing the job...

I'm starting this log to provide current information and comments on a regular basis to aid in the understanding of what Bentley Services International can provide for you or your business. Check back often and email me your comments and I can include them in this log as appropriate.

BSI is currently working on sports photography and websites for a variety of companies. We pride ourselves on being a low-cost alternative. Our approach builds on previous work to produce quality pages that adhere to established web standards. I am always surprised when major sites do not follow the established standards.

We validate all our pages and play a little 'game.' We look for sites that produce the highest number of validation errors. Some of the highest error producing sites are from web design companies. Isn't that a surprise?