Site Info

Shannon Moeller

Shannon Moeller

November 26th, 2008 Category: Portfolio

21 comments to “Shannon Moeller”

  1. Kalel Says:
    November 26th, 2008 at 4:08 am

    A brave person to display a lack of CSS validation.

    I was bored with the website at first glance - it begins with fairly generic practises. But then I scrolled further down, and entered the extra pages, where there is much more inspiration to be had. I’m really digging the use of the headings.

  2. craigH Says:
    November 26th, 2008 at 5:23 am

    Whats with this paper plain lark, in the left hand corner ? loads of sites have this these days.

  3. umut Says:
    November 26th, 2008 at 6:14 am

    Chris, dont u mean the right corner?

    i think there is a lot more potential for this.. but i wonna know why u havent bothered to clean ur errors?
    and secondly, test in IE6? is that a protest thing? its a mess! esp with the png..

    either ur lazy, protesting or havent got a clue!

  4. Shannon Moeller Says:
    November 26th, 2008 at 10:24 am

    @Katel: Thanks for digging deeper!

    @umut: The CSS “errors” aren’t actually errors and are quite intentional. I’m using CSS3 properties with the “-webkit” and “-moz” prefixes which don’t validate. You’ll find the rest of the CSS validates quite nicely.

    And I am not supporting IE6 or Firefox 2. Basic premise of all of that: Use a better browser, get a better experience.

    Thanks for the feedback! It’s quite the honor to have been featured here.

  5. Jamie Says:
    November 26th, 2008 at 10:48 am

    Paper airplanes are in style! ha

  6. Afovea Says:
    November 26th, 2008 at 11:35 am

    Clean, good-looking and well done… Death to IE6… viva la revolution!

  7. Judgemental User Says:
    November 26th, 2008 at 1:30 pm

    I dont want to start a flame on a very nice website post but:

    @umut: Your site fails XHTML validation and you have a little tick at the bottom of your site to say it passes….tut tut :)

    Nice site Shannon

  8. author Says:
    November 28th, 2008 at 3:09 am

    @Kalel and @Judgmental User. Who cares if if passes validation. While it’s unquestionably good practice to have valid and accessible sites, it isn’t a requirement to be featured on this site. It’s the “best web gallery” which clearly showcases the visual aesthetics of sites, not the best valid XHTML 1.0 Strict gallery and showcasing source code and the green label of approval.

  9. Kalel Says:
    November 28th, 2008 at 7:40 pm

    @author. It’s true that design is the fundamental aspect for being successful in placing on this website. But there is more to the web than just “aesthetics”, and as this is the ‘Best Web Gallery’ it shouldn’t merely take in pretty designs that abolish the other practises that developers scrutinize over. CSS validation isn’t really an issue, I agree with Shannon Moeller on that one, but I just found it a strange practise to showcase this lack of validation. Aside from that, I’m still digging the site - so well done.

  10. Anthony Bruno Says:
    November 30th, 2008 at 2:28 am

    “The main point of validation is to know that you are doing something correctly. ”
    - Jeffrey Way

    @Afovea To simply not support a browser that people are using is ludicrous. As a web designer, you must develop a product that is accessible. If anything, use a modern browser as a benchmark and have graceful degradation for the less capable IE6.

    In talking about this design, I feel that the paper airplanes are very overdone. I would almost say its a lack of creativity and very unoriginal when it comes to the design. But overall its a nice layout and the paper plane feels like an afterthought.

    Also I feel like the font does not fit that well either. I think it might be archer, which is used way too much. Could have to do with the fact that it leaked to popular torrent sites a few months ago.

  11. Anthony Bruno Says:
    November 30th, 2008 at 2:31 am

    One more thing, (there should be a edit post btw)

    Why is there this trend of providing the little acknowledgements at the bottom of these pages displaying weather or not a site is valid?

    I mean is that type of information going to be something that will be useful for the target audience? Or is it something to show off to your code buddies that you know what you are doing?

  12. David Says:
    December 2nd, 2008 at 12:25 pm

    @Anthony - I have to disagree with you. I think that font is fine. It would be a bit easier on the eyes if she picked something simpler, but overall I think is a pretty nice site.

    One comment, I dig the refrigerator in the logo ascetically, though I don’t know how it relates to web-design, and the green one creates a lot of tension in the upper area.

  13. David Says:
    December 2nd, 2008 at 12:33 pm

    Hmm, oh and I don’t see much need for the airplanes. I guess I just don’t understand the concept. So, on second thought, I give this site a 6 out of 10.

  14. umut Says:
    December 3rd, 2008 at 8:10 am

    @Anthony: I see what you mean, to most people they will have no idea what it means and why its there.
    But, if I can show to the people that know, that I can abide by the rules set by the industry I want to be a party of, and then pull off a website that is compliant to most browsers, then why not?

    I do agree with you about “graceful degradation for the less capable IE6″ - even a splash page that explains something would be better than a completely broken one..

    @Judgemental User: Haha DOH! Thanks for the pointer, forgot to delete a line, will sort later.

  15. JeremyB Says:
    December 7th, 2008 at 7:41 pm

    My only complaint is on the main page. He is joining an independent clause to a dependent clause and should use a comma, not a semicolon.

  16. Brandon Says:
    December 9th, 2008 at 2:29 am

    So, apparently, nobody who was complaining about the paper airplane noticed that its path highlighted the selected section of the site. I haven’t come across a treatment like that, which I think is very clever. The attention to detail makes a difference.

    As for validation; is it not just as important to show that you are ahead of the curve by using and implementing new, valid (they actually ARE valid according to the W3C, but their validator hasn’t been updated yet) CSS properties?

    I would venture to guess that most web designers are fairly comfortable accommodating older browsers, but how many are also pushing forward and trying new things? I think that’s what Shannon is doing here, and I think he’s highly successful with it.

  17. Shannon Moeller Says:
    December 9th, 2008 at 7:19 pm

    @Brandon: Thank you very much.

  18. Peter Schaefer Says:
    December 10th, 2008 at 10:33 am

    Shannon this is great! Congratulations on your wonderful website! Would you care to comment on mine? Hope to hear back from you!

    Lautus Design

  19. Chikezie Says:
    December 10th, 2008 at 1:33 pm

    I like the overall design of the web design - like @Brandon, I agree with the cleverness of the menu. However, I disagree with the idea of degrading the experience for those in older browsers of IE6.
    Internet Explorer 6, is a pain in the butt - I know this - but it shouldn’t be the bane of your existence; it should be the foundation of your CSS and usability skills as a ‘web’ designer.
    That’s what differentiates you from the graphic designers who don’t know or don’t care about the web and usability.

    Does it suck that we’ll always have to setup extra CSS attributes for IE6?
    Yes.
    But is it unfair for visitors unfamiliar with Firefox or Safari to get a poor experience of your work?
    Definitely.

    Take the time to give everyone the same experience, and your clients and future clients, and even fellow designers will love you for it.

  20. David Says:
    December 22nd, 2008 at 10:10 pm

    http://www.myjustdot.com/

  21. David Says:
    December 23rd, 2008 at 3:41 pm

    http://kyanmedia.com/

Post your comments

Design Jobs on the Wall

See all Design Jobs