Getting a site designed and coded separately. (What do I need to know?)

Status
Not open for further replies.
UnripeArbiter

UnripeArbiter

Extreme Skeptic.
Dec 21, 2006
1,026
14
0
The Vortex.™
OK, I'm going to be using the design services of 99designs to get a web site designed.

What do I need to tell the designers to insure compatibility with the programming that comes later?

Site will be using ajax, 3rd party xml api, some kinda database probably.

Will the designer be able to freely create my vision without worrying about the design's compatibility with the programming to come? I don't want to spend the effort and money to find out I need major changes to the design.

Thanks a lot!
 


Well most of the coding functions can be made independent of the design (ie: ajax, xml, database, etc). Since those are for the most part server sided technology that'll plug into the design. Assuming of course the designers provide you with an xHTML mockup.

If you are planing on building websites from scratch, as long as the designer provides you with an xHTML template, you will for the most part not have a problem with most competent coders. (otherwise you can find a PSD->xhtml or PSD->wordpress service, also some coders are capable of it)

Though if you plan on using a CMS, such as wordpress, be sure to mention that to the designer, as some can make em wordpress ready.

If the designer does not do any xhtml/wordpress/etc templates, make sure at the very least obtain a full photoshop document that has everything on their own layer. As this will make the transition into a website far more flexible (as opposed to some idiot that flattens the entire design and sends it to ya).
 
Great.

The site will be built from scratch, no CMS.

So, make sure to get it as xHTML template or at the very least unflattened .psd .

Also, there will be a real-time chart displaying the polling numbers of questions that we have asked our users (really the main part of our service) I'm confused on how to go about getting it designed/coded specifically which to do first.

If we go to the designer first he may come up with some beautiful looking graph, but would be useless when we get to the coder. If we go to the coder first the design may seriously hurt, but at least it would function. Do we just need to get them collaborating together?
 
There will also be expanding and collapsing behaviors (like a user's control panel for example that expands onto the screen when 'expand' or whatever is clicked.)

Would the designer need to draw it open and closed AND the "animations" in between as it expands/collapses? If that makes sense.

Thanks a lot!
 
UnripeArbiter said:
There will also be expanding and collapsing behaviors (like a user's control panel for example that expands onto the screen when 'expand' or whatever is clicked.)

Would the designer need to draw it open and closed AND the "animations" in between as it expands/collapses? If that makes sense.

Thanks a lot!
Click to expand...

Some segments can simply collapse to the segment bar, and usually have some kind of open/close indicator change. Normally this would not be animated unless you had the coder implement something like mootools, jquery, or scriptaculous to allow flash-like visual behaviors on the site (but all in javascript). So the expanding/collapsing/tab etc bit should be easily managed.

Far as the graphs go, it depends on the nature of drawing them, some aspect could be simple collection of sprites (kinda like our +rep bar), others might resort to using some other means.

Basically if you intend on changes in graphics on the site, you need to communicate those needs clearly to the designer. For example if you have a segment that you intend on expanding and closing, relay to the designer that you would like that section to also have a "closed" state drawn out, this way the coder if need be can simply swap out the two depending on the state of the section.

I guess in the end, either side you deal with you should be clear on your intentions, and behaviors of the site.

Least its good you're looking to separate the task, as you know what they say, "jack of all trade, master of none".
 
Yeah I do also code and one thing I hate doing is trying to code someone elses mashed up design. The problem is most designers don't know how to make an online design work so they come with something that looks really cool, but will end up being reiduclous hard to edit latter down the road and useless for SEO.

There are exceptions, but generally getting your site designed by soemone who can do HTML/CSS will mean they will understand what works are what doesn't.

Just my opinion, good luck with whatever you do.
 
I'm definitely going to be getting a separate designer and coder....

Like kbless said "jack of all trade, master of none".

And like you said larry "Yeah I do also code and one thing I hate doing is trying to code someone elses mashed up design."

That's why I'm asking this question.... to make it as smooth as possible.
 
I don't foresee any problems with going with a separate designer/coder. I am a coder and I don't think I'd have any difficult at all making any (remotely reasonable) design work.

As for graphing, you may want to use a piece of software that already has the capability for graphing. I don't use them so I don't really know any off hand.
 
Thanks do3boy.

We're going to start our design process soon so good to hear.

As for the graphs, yes we found some solutions that are "pre-coded" for lack of better term. We're hoping we can reach the level of customization we desire however.

AJAX graphs Company called dundas visualization appears, at the moment, to be the trick
 
Design should always be separate from implementation. This should always be the case with software development. Website design typically includes designing the graphics and setting up a CSS based general layout. Therefore I would expect you to tell your designer which framework you are using if any (for example WordPress, CSS only, Drupal, etc...), and that designer would deliver a layered graphics object along with a basic one-page website template.

The reason that this is the best practice, is (especially when you are working with complex Ajax apps) you might have a graphic designer that comes up with something slick, but which is nearly impossible to implement in code. If that person doesn't deliver a working CSS/HTML/Javascript template, you may end up stuck in redesign mode forever.

As far as complex database apps, as long as your designer delievers the basic page template I keep talking about, any programmer should be able to integrate the rest of the functionality of the website into the template. This is why we separate design from implementation.

In conclusion, unless you are designing a very simple website, I would not get a graphics file from someone who is not going to implement a basic working page template, but it is not always necessary to have the designer code the complex PHP/ASP/DBMS features of the site.
 
stevehnsn said:
Design should always be separate from implementation. This should always be the case with software development. Website design typically includes designing the graphics and setting up a CSS based general layout. Therefore I would expect you to tell your designer which framework you are using if any (for example WordPress, CSS only, Drupal, etc...), and that designer would deliver a layered graphics object along with a basic one-page website template.

The reason that this is the best practice, is (especially when you are working with complex Ajax apps) you might have a graphic designer that comes up with something slick, but which is nearly impossible to implement in code. If that person doesn't deliver a working CSS/HTML/Javascript template, you may end up stuck in redesign mode forever.

As far as complex database apps, as long as your designer delievers the basic page template I keep talking about, any programmer should be able to integrate the rest of the functionality of the website into the template. This is why we separate design from implementation.

In conclusion, unless you are designing a very simple website, I would not get a graphics file from someone who is not going to implement a basic working page template, but it is not always necessary to have the designer code the complex PHP/ASP/DBMS features of the site.
Click to expand...

I'd be curious to see a design, short of animation that would be impossible to get into xHTML/CSS.
 
kblessinggr said:
I'd be curious to see a design, short of animation that would be impossible to get into xHTML/CSS.
Click to expand...

You are right, there's almost always a way to get even the craziest design into some kind of code using JS or Ajax. It is not unheard of however, for a coder to spend days and days trying to implement some kind of dynamic, z-layer implemented, drag and drop functionality of some sort. Then it becomes even harder to get it to work on all browsers.

All I'm saying is that your best bet is to get a designer that knows how to code webpages if he/she is also designing a site with dynamic widgets. It will make it easier in the long run to progress from graphics to a working template.
 
stevehnsn said:
You are right, there's almost always a way to get even the craziest design into some kind of code using JS or Ajax. It is not unheard of however, for a coder to spend days and days trying to implement some kind of dynamic, z-layer implemented, drag and drop functionality of some sort. Then it becomes even harder to get it to work on all browsers.

All I'm saying is that your best bet is to get a designer that knows how to code webpages if he/she is also designing a site with dynamic widgets. It will make it easier in the long run to progress from graphics to a working template.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't need JS/Ajax unless some animation was involved as I said. And drag-drop is considered "animation" when I speak of design (also drag-drop is actually very easy to do within an hour using prototype/scriptaculous, jquery, mootools, dojo, or any other poison of choice). I'm talking bout design, say from a photoshop mockup, not 'concept' which seems to be what you're describing.

For example, a 4-state rollover could easily be done with only pure CSS and a single image.

And as per this comment "Then it becomes even harder to get it to work on all browsers. ", not neccessarily true if you stick with a javascript framework such as prototype/scriptaculous or JQuery since they're built on being cross-browser compatible.

Between CSS and transparent pngs, there's very little short of animation that is impossible to convert.
 
kblessinggr said:
You wouldn't need JS/Ajax unless some animation was involved as I said. And drag-drop is considered "animation" when I speak of design (also drag-drop is actually very easy to do within an hour using prototype/scriptaculous, jquery, mootools, dojo, or any other poison of choice). I'm talking bout design, say from a photoshop mockup, not 'concept' which seems to be what you're describing.

For example, a 4-state rollover could easily be done with only pure CSS and a single image.

And as per this comment "Then it becomes even harder to get it to work on all browsers. ", not neccessarily true if you stick with a javascript framework such as prototype/scriptaculous or JQuery since they're built on being cross-browser compatible.

Between CSS and transparent pngs, there's very little short of animation that is impossible to convert.
Click to expand...

I mean I mostly agree with you, but I would prefer to use a designer that has some knowledge of web development.
 
stevehnsn said:
I mean I mostly agree with you, but I would prefer to use a designer that has some knowledge of web development.
Click to expand...

I'm not exactly disagreeing with you, but just saying perse that finding one who is quite extensive in webdevelopment but also a designer kind of shifts that paradigm into the "jack of all trades" zone.

I guess in a way, that yes it would be nice to have a designer that at least "understands" the practical approach to a web design (emphasis on 'web'), but doesn't necessarily have to know how to code it. And preferably a designer that doesn't put out either a flattened PSD file, or one with 80 unlabeled layers in no particular order making it hell for anyone who has to code the design over to xhtml.

But in a way a proficient webdeveloper is going to be able to look at a design, and know how to make it more than just a bunch of sliced images while at the same time keeping the performance robusts, quality good and size small.

So if you found a designer that does just that and understand proper organization with the photoshop document and praticality (ie: not expecting every typeface to be made into a graphic on the website), and a coder that could translate all that, it would be a far more productive pair, as opposed to spending twice as much to get half as much done or twice as long to get it done.

In the end, nothing trumps Client's personal preference.
 
Give a good coder a PSD file and he can do the rest of the coding, including cutting up the image. If not, then he wasn't made for web programming. Designer should never really do any of the CSS or HTML IMO.
 
As someone who does not use a cms and WHO DOES DO his own design & programming I can tell you for a fact that it's child's play to get design & programming separate. The designer does not have to know a damn thing about programming .. the programmer should not have to deal with any photoshop.

It works like this ...

1. designer creates template (photoshop, stock css, whatever) and gives you final html
2. the programmer cuts the html into a header, menu, body & footer so that each can be dynamic on their own terms.
3. all the programmer has to do is simply drop variables & if statements into the sections and include them with each page, just like config.php, functions.php, etc.

The index.php file will actually be the body but will surround itself with the header, menu and footer. After your home page is up, index.php page is simply used as a standard template for rendering other pages (pages = sections if dynamic via url variables).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom