Why not to make an ugly web site

Miscellaneous Forums/General Discussion/Why not to make an ugly web site

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/09/224204&from=rss

While I don't agree that someone should be sued for making an inaccessible web site (kind of like a blind person getting pissed off about being unable to recognize a building's decorative paint?), and this is further proof that our justice systems are a mess, I have to say this pleases me.

I looked at Target's web site just to be sure, and I actually agree: That thing is awful!
The appearance is fine; just like every other web site out there, but fine. A bit of Flash, but not really misused.
It is not the appearance that is the problem, though. Click around a bit.
The first thing I noticed was that the navigation bar on the left, while posing as many lines of static plain text links, is actually a giant image containing plain text made clickable via an image map! This makes navigation impossible for many people, and is just plain wrong. Even more strange is how other sections of the web site do proper plain text links just fine and they look identical to the nav bar ones... so why are they not used everywhere?
That's not everything, though!
As I said, poke around. It's awful.

Web designers who create stuff like that should be ashamed, and companies that encourage the development of such things should be deeply sorry.

Well, I previously wrote a wonderful rant about nintendowifi.com's Flash navigation bar, with which they were good enough to have Alt text containing a link to get Flash but they didn't think to just have that Alt text give me the blasted links!
That whole web site is reasonably accessible without Flash, with the only problem being the inability to operate its navigation buttons.
I guess that's the entirety of it, anyway.
So I wrote a great 5 page rant, then I accidentally discovered another hotkey which closes the current program (not Alt-F4, and it wasn't a crash) so I lost it.
Consider yourself lucky...
That was off topic...


Anyhow, as you may have guessed, I am pursuing a future as a vigilante Internet Cop.

I will avenge you, poor oppressed people crushed under the vile hands of Target, my arch nemesis!

It was taking to long to load so I didnt bother seeing how crp it was.

Well, it's really not that bad, but it has those little accessibility errors that people generally won't notice, and if they do they usually won't care.
But when you do notice, it really sucks!

Although, this is truly an achievement:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=www.target.com

Okay, lots of web sites don't bother with w3 standards and thus confuse the validator, but... Eugh. Getting 556 errors is a skill, and a heck of a lot of those are simple things like tags requiring Alt attributes.

I suppose what I really originally meant to state before my ranting took over was that the whole situation is absurd.
Judges who let folks sue for stuff like this could really do with looking at things more critically and not being caught up in the horrendously thick law books which seem to be eating our souls.

I can't see the website I get a bunch of what looks like HTML although it does have embedded in it further down "Site Temporarily Unavailable"....