--You seem to be a professional website designer. Can you please post links to websites you have designed? Maybe I can learn some stuff.

--The point was actually to design a single-page website. see www.onepagelove.com.

--the gallery section cannot show up in a search engine as a different page because it's not a separate page.

--The CSS is not on the html file. As for the JS, it was necessary for it to work as expected. I'll still 'gzip' the file to compress it.

--The 'white space" near the contact form is a facebook Like Box. I wonder why it does not show on your browser. It works well on other computers. I'll troubleshoot that.

--The client LOVES the header that way.

--Concerning validation, I'll handle that ASAP. Currently, the message does not get sent unless an e-mail address is entered.

You seem to be a professional website designer. Can you please post links to websites you have designed? Maybe I can learn some stuff.
I don't share "my works" in the public arena.  You can contact me privately for that though

The point was actually to design a single-page website. see www.onepagelove.com.
The whole, "I am doing it because google (of course not google in this case) does it" doesn't and shouldn't fly all the time.  This is one of them.

--the gallery section cannot show up in a search engine as a different page because it's not a separate page.
Which is why I said split out the pages 

The CSS is not on the html file. As for the JS, it was necessary for it to work as expected. I'll still 'gzip' the file to compress it.
I didn't say you had CSS on the page.  It was general advice.  As per javascript, you can call a fxn onload and then write the code for that function in a js file that you call in your script tag.

The 'white space" near the contact form is a facebook Like Box. I wonder why it does not show on your browser. It works well on other computers. I'll troubleshoot that.
Always code for Firefox first, as a developer.  Also, code incrementally, which means, build a section and test in all browsers, then move to the next.  This way, you know where any problems come from.

The client LOVES the header that way.
[/b]Still doesn't make it right. I have argued features with commissioners, and won so it isn't hard, as long as you do it professionally and with proof.

Concerning validation, I'll handle that ASAP. Currently, the message does not get sent unless an e-mail address is entered.
[b]Your validation script isn't validating email addresses and phone numbers properly.  It isn't enough to just check if the field is empty.  You need to check for patterns as well.  Also, it isn't enough to just validate on the front end.  You need to validate  on the back end as well.  This helps mitigate security risks.

Donpuzo:

Please can i have the contact of any of this babes,

Then we can talk of review!

they are "your" works though, I don't see any reason why you shouldn't want to show it publicly. I mean designers have online portfolios and they show their works,

No. One page website is fast becoming the trend,  started roughly middle 2009. If it's nice, why not? would you say website like this, www.agcchicago.org, is bad because it has implemented the one page technique? No. So, there's nothing absolutely wrong with the one page website.

What's the point here? Google would bring out the page eventually,  and the navigation is bold enough for the "searcher" to see the Gallery

@yawa-ti-de:
---Thanks for reviewing again. You even went as far as reviewing every statement I made in the reply. You really like reviewing, don't you?

Allow me to clarify: I don't "show my works" on online fora.  Yes, I do have a website that features "my works" and if you are a potential client, in addition to sharing my url with you, I also visit you with an album containing a print out of same "works" but no, I won't display it on online fora. Also, if you YIM me privately, something many have done, I will show it to you but again, not on an online fora.  I have my reasons.  Better?

1) The site you reference is not a 1-page site.  Even if it were, I would prefer chazy's to yours. 

2) At the end of the day, it is all about usability.  There is a good book, now in its second edition that is called, "Don't make me think" by Steve Krug.  I respectfully suggest that you read both editions

I would like to focus on the "eventually" part of this comment.  These days, 80% of users, according to the last research that I read, don't even look past the 1st 5 returned results in google.  "Eventually" no longer cuts it.  Either you are in, assuming your site is aimed at generating income/donations, or u r out.  Sorry.

Talking about SEO, I know my way around that to the level of my peers in the field so I can say a little bit about this. First, the research you are talking about is people searching based on "tags" (for example, someone searching for a web designer in Nigeria and types "Web Designer Nigeria" or "Web Designer in Nigeria". Yes, you are right. they just look at the first few results and X the page. These people never pressed second page. I can say for years also, I have never clicked Page 2 of Google.

However, If you aim at optimizing your website for this kind of search, splitting the site would not do jerk! It's a fact. What you'ld be looking at are the Inline elements of the website. We are talking about wrapping even images in headers like [<h1>Logo of Whatever<img src="wateva.jpg" /></h1>] and some css to hide the text so that even google would read the images or flash that it wouldn't on a normal situation.

I completely agree with your concern on the SEO capabilities of the website what I'm just saying is that what you suggested might not have any effect.

Allow me to clarify: I don't "show my works" on online fora. Yes, I do have a website that features "my works" and if you are a potential client, in addition to sharing my url with you, I also visit you with an album containing a print out of same "works" but no, I won't display it on online fora. Also, if you YIM me privately, something many have done, I will show it to you but again, not on an online fora. I have my reasons. Better?

1) The site you reference is not a 1-page site. Even if it were, I would prefer chazy's to yours.

2) At the end of the day, it is all about usability. There is a good book, now in its second edition that is called, "Don't make me think" by Steve Krug. I respectfully suggest that you read both editions

I would like to focus on the "eventually" part of this comment. These days, 80% of users, according to the last research that I read, don't even look past the 1st 5 returned results in google. "Eventually" no longer cuts it. Either you are in, assuming your site is aimed at generating income/donations, or u r out. Sorry.

Allow me to clarify: I don't "show my works" on online fora. Yes, I do have a website that features "my works" and if you are a potential client, in addition to sharing my url with you, I also visit you with an album containing a print out of same "works" but no, I won't display it on online fora. Also, if you YIM me privately, something many have done, I will show it to you but again, not on an online fora. I have my reasons. Better?

1) The site you reference is not a 1-page site. Even if it were, I would prefer chazy's to yours.

2) At the end of the day, it is all about usability. There is a good book, now in its second edition that is called, "Don't make me think" by Steve Krug. I respectfully suggest that you read both editions

I would like to focus on the "eventually" part of this comment. These days, 80% of users, according to the last research that I read, don't even look past the 1st 5 returned results in google. "Eventually" no longer cuts it. Either you are in, assuming your site is aimed at generating income/donations, or u r out. Sorry.

Allow me to clarify: I don't "show my works" on online fora. Yes, I do have a website that features "my works" and if you are a potential client, in addition to sharing my url with you, I also visit you with an album containing a print out of same "works" but no, I won't display it on online fora. Also, if you YIM me privately, something many have done, I will show it to you but again, not on an online fora. I have my reasons. Better?

1) The site you reference is not a 1-page site. Even if it were, I would prefer chazy's to yours.

2) At the end of the day, it is all about usability. There is a good book, now in its second edition that is called, "Don't make me think" by Steve Krug. I respectfully suggest that you read both editions

I would like to focus on the "eventually" part of this comment. These days, 80% of users, according to the last research that I read, don't even look past the 1st 5 returned results in google. "Eventually" no longer cuts it. Either you are in, assuming your site is aimed at generating income/donations, or u r out. Sorry.

Well. . . I wouldn't go as far as asking a web designer what his ID is, in order to gain access to his previous works when I can view others with a single search in google (thinking the way real and powerful clients think) . That is why web designers, developers, anybody in the creative field, has an online porfolio for. . . "To show people". . an by the way, If I was interviewing a developer for a job, I wouldn't accept a "print out" as his portfolio. I mean, how do we access the functionality of the works? Except ofcourse he is applying as a front-End designer or a graphic designer Let's just move on from that. On to the next one.

At first, that link was a mistake. I was trying to show this. http://www.agcchicago.org/netpositive/ . And none of them is my work. . . I just brought it up to show a one page site, which to me, is nice except you've got your own subjective reason to dislike a one page website. . . and that is totally welcome. And thank you so much for the book recommendation, I would seehow I can get hold of it digitally or the hard copy. Whichever way. and To reciprocate that, You can also try to read this, digitally though, "Designing With Progressive Enhancement" by Todd Parker et al. a little advanced but the best to meet up with the current design trend.

Talking about SEO, I know my way around that to the level of my peers in the field so I can say a little bit about this. First, the research you are talking about is people searching based on "tags" (for example, someone searching for a web designer in Nigeria and types "Web Designer Nigeria" or "Web Designer in Nigeria". Yes, you are right. they just look at the first few results and X the page. These people never pressed second page. I can say for years also, I have never clicked Page 2 of Google.

However, If you aim at optimizing your website for this kind of search, splitting the site would not do jerk! It's a fact. What you'ld be looking at are the Inline elements of the website. We are talking about wrapping even images in headers like [<h1>Logo of Whatever<img src="wateva.jpg" /></h1>] and some css to hide the text so that even google would read the images or flash that it wouldn't on a normal situation.

I completely agree with your concern on the SEO capabilities of the website what I'm just saying is that what you suggested might not have any effect.

yawa-ti-de:

I am afraid we can't move on, just because you say so. Sorry.
Well, There's nothing about "moving on" that we need to be egotistic about. It's a natural course that would happen. We would have to do that eventually either It is said or not.

yawa-ti-de:

I don't carry around my laptop everywhere I go. Also, not all clients you meet have access to a computer at the time you meet with them. In order to give those who fall into either category a "taste", I always have with me a binder showing the home page of every site I have done, in addition to a business card and a postcard. The latter 2 have information regarding how to access what I have done online, including functionality and design. I hope that explains it for you.

yawa-ti-de:

A little advanced? I am trembling as we speak. My nit wit brain will probably not be able to digest then, I guess. Interestingly, I have been on the bandwagon of progressive enhancement and graceful degradation for quite a few years now.

yawa-ti-de:

Oh, by the way, referring to http://www.agcchicago.org/netpositive/, I scrolled down to "our reason", copied the first line, pasted it in google and as expected, the first result was that site. When I clicked, however, it stuck on the home/first page, without taking me to the section for "our reason". In other words, I would then have to spend some time, no matter how small, trying to figure out that section was. Again, more reason to read that book I recommended. It is not about me, or what I like or don't like. Obviously, every site, no matter how bad, has its place and audience but again, that doesn't make it right for all occasions.

yawa-ti-de:

You agree then you disagree then you agree again. Then to top it all off, you just had to throw in "jerk". Okay o. Again, my simpleton mind at work. No worries. By the way, and you probably already know this: Google doesn't read images, even with text wrapped around it. It read the text (alt and title tags) associated with the images. If you code with that in mind, you don't need to do any CSS "effizy".

*dhtml:

yawatide is 200% correct here (still i wonder why these guys. . .)

- buenos dias y hasta la vista a todos

Anyways, at the end of the day, it's what works for you. so, there's nothing much to say.

Am sorry if my "little advance" insulted your sensibilities, I just made that in reference to the book not reference to whom am speaking with. I must tell you at this point that I only engage in arguments that I will learn from. . . and I don't argue to display my ego level. Instead of doing that, there are tons of positive things I can use my time with. It's good you've got Progressive Enhancement locked down. I like designers who know what exactly there job is.

You're right. No doubt. The "however point' I am making in this context is compromising the one page technique for SEO is not really important, in my opinion. There are other tons of ways to achieve SEO without comprising the technique. For instance, the 'pages' are wrapped in divs on that one page and so, there's a way to return to the results pointing to the actual url of the div you searched for. for example, searching for "whatever contact" might return a search result with url "www.whatever.com/index.html#contact" . My point is you can achieve an effective SEO without neccesarily breaking them to pages and the fact that it can't work all the time; we are talking about a site here and i think it's just suitable for it. There's no much to say on the webiste.

I do that because it's a polite argument. We're not bunch of kids that starts fight in the next second. You're making a point and I might agree in some part and think otherwise with some parts. That's how constructive argument works (I think) and I'm not assuming you've got "simpleton mind". IT's not about who's BETTER or sort of things like that. I'm just making my point here, that's all.

I never said it reads images. I said it would "indirectly" read it "if wrapped around, for instance "h1m h2 or whatever". I'm saying, to enhance your optimization, there are situation's where you might not be able to add "ALT or Title" (ask me why?) : I'm talking about "background images" that would be declared inside your stylesheet and not inline images. How do you make it search engine friendly? it's by writing something into its DIV in the markup. and applying the css effizy (dont know why u called it that) into the stylesheet. I'm talking about "text-indent:-9999". with that google reads that text and brings out the page where that background is in results and more effectively, it helps more in "Google or Whatever Image Search"

bouzymill1:

yeah! why these guy do what? why the ellipsis? finish your line bro.