Computer Database
A computer database is basically a compilation of information stored in a system in a manner that makes it easily retrievable. A database operates like an online filing system and stores data categorically to make retrieval simpler.
"Traditional databases are organized by fields, records, and files. A field is a single piece of information; a record is one complete set of fields; and a file is a collection of records. For example, a telephone book is analogous to a file. It contains a list of records, each of which consists of three fields: name, address, and telephone number. "
[Source: http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/D/database.html]
I found the above explanation easy to understand in terms of how a database works. I was able to derive a good visual in my head from this description of how a database is structured and how it categorizes and maintains information.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
Assignment 5
Basic Elements of Web Configuration
In trying to understand the basic computer and web terminology, I must admit I'm finding it all a bit complicated, excessive, and overwhelming. Here, I tried to assemble the best understanding of the basic elements and components of web configuration and proper functionality of a website. And I added a couple of diagrams which helped me gain a little better of an understanding of some of the terms.
One of the largest features is a web server, which is essentially a computer program created to acknowledge and read HTTP requests and respond to these requests with HTTP content which usually include HTML (web pages) and linked objects such as images. A web server could also be classified as a computer that is set up to host Web pages. So if someone types the URL http://www.fandango.com/ into their computer, a web server will locate this information in the W3C and send the information to the computer/person that requested it.
File Transfer Protocol (FTP) is a simple and secure means of exchanging files over the Internet. The most common way that FTP is utilized is by downloading files from the Internet, such as music and pictures. Just as with a typical Website (an HTTP site), an FTP site stores and
organizes information and offers the creator the option to make their site public or private. It is often difficult or impossible to upload FTP files on a Web browser. Often an FTP Client is required for uploading and downloading FTP files, which is basically software that is designed to transfer files back and forth over the Internet between two computers. A typical FTP Client design is composed of two panes and looks like this diagram to the right. The left pane illustrates the files on your computer while the pane on the right side shows the files on the opposite computer.
A Domain Name System is a system created to apply names to computers, services, and basically any resource involved with the Internet. A DNS is a great organizing principle that associates various information to domain names given to participants as a means of identification across the Web spectrum. It doesn not depend on a users physical location. The naming system is basically an easier way to name computers' numerical addresses and make them more personified and identifiable. I found this bit a little too complicated to really fully grasp.
A chmod allows a user to set permissions for certain files on ones Web server. Such permissions vary and allow certain individuals access to certain information. For instance, permissions may be set that allow only the owner to view files while others can be set to allow a certain group or everyone access. Permission codes are set up with corresponding numbers that range from 0-7, with seven allowing the most access. The following diagram gives a better understanding of how the numbers and permissions correspond to allow access.
The number 0 essentially grants no permission while 4 grants permission to Read only, and the number 7 grants permission to Read, Write and Execute a file. So the number 777 allows for the most access by anyone while number 700 only allows the owner access to a file. This was perhaps the easiest aspect of Web configuration for me to understand. Why can't all of the codes and instructions be this simple?
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_server
http://www.ftpplanet.com/ftpresources/basics/htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_name_system
http://www.pageresource.com/cgirec/chmod.htm
In trying to understand the basic computer and web terminology, I must admit I'm finding it all a bit complicated, excessive, and overwhelming. Here, I tried to assemble the best understanding of the basic elements and components of web configuration and proper functionality of a website. And I added a couple of diagrams which helped me gain a little better of an understanding of some of the terms.
One of the largest features is a web server, which is essentially a computer program created to acknowledge and read HTTP requests and respond to these requests with HTTP content which usually include HTML (web pages) and linked objects such as images. A web server could also be classified as a computer that is set up to host Web pages. So if someone types the URL http://www.fandango.com/ into their computer, a web server will locate this information in the W3C and send the information to the computer/person that requested it.
File Transfer Protocol (FTP) is a simple and secure means of exchanging files over the Internet. The most common way that FTP is utilized is by downloading files from the Internet, such as music and pictures. Just as with a typical Website (an HTTP site), an FTP site stores and
organizes information and offers the creator the option to make their site public or private. It is often difficult or impossible to upload FTP files on a Web browser. Often an FTP Client is required for uploading and downloading FTP files, which is basically software that is designed to transfer files back and forth over the Internet between two computers. A typical FTP Client design is composed of two panes and looks like this diagram to the right. The left pane illustrates the files on your computer while the pane on the right side shows the files on the opposite computer.A Domain Name System is a system created to apply names to computers, services, and basically any resource involved with the Internet. A DNS is a great organizing principle that associates various information to domain names given to participants as a means of identification across the Web spectrum. It doesn not depend on a users physical location. The naming system is basically an easier way to name computers' numerical addresses and make them more personified and identifiable. I found this bit a little too complicated to really fully grasp.
A chmod allows a user to set permissions for certain files on ones Web server. Such permissions vary and allow certain individuals access to certain information. For instance, permissions may be set that allow only the owner to view files while others can be set to allow a certain group or everyone access. Permission codes are set up with corresponding numbers that range from 0-7, with seven allowing the most access. The following diagram gives a better understanding of how the numbers and permissions correspond to allow access.
The number 0 essentially grants no permission while 4 grants permission to Read only, and the number 7 grants permission to Read, Write and Execute a file. So the number 777 allows for the most access by anyone while number 700 only allows the owner access to a file. This was perhaps the easiest aspect of Web configuration for me to understand. Why can't all of the codes and instructions be this simple?Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_server
http://www.ftpplanet.com/ftpresources/basics/htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_name_system
http://www.pageresource.com/cgirec/chmod.htm
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Assignment 4
1: Experimenting with Dreamweaver:
So I was able to create SOMETHING in Dreamweaver. I did not however attempt to recreate my blog, I sorta just created my own page (on graffiti) to experiment and see what I was capable of. It took me about an hour and a half to two hours total to formulate my masterpiece. I was able to figure out out how to change the background color of my site, which was one of my questions last week. I have no clue how to put a picture of what I've created into my blog so I guess it will be a surprise (good or bad, probably bad) in class tonight. So I was able to use divs to insert pictures and text and all that good stuff. I used a 1 row, 3 column table to insert pictures as well. And instead of inserting a background color I inserted a picture for my site background. All of the pictures I used are from the internet though, not my own. All in all, this experience was a little less frustrating than the last but the prospect of creating a legitimate webpage is still overwhelming to me.
2: Elushika's Comment on my blog:
While she didn't suggest any changes for my blog, I would like to see if there's a possible way to resize my picture because Blogger resizes it (I assume because it's too big). Maybe this is something I could do in Photoshop.
3: Comments on other blogs:
I commented on the following classmates' blogs: Michael Goncalves, Ivana Morgan, & Kristin Cardo.
4: Reading Assignment-Fonts & the Web:
The average web surfer may not care what font they are reading when they visit a website. But this is a very important detail to many if not most designers. Typically, without web embedding tools, when someone visits a website the font would automatically change to a default setting on that particular computer and in most cases would not display the original font intended by that website's designer.
Well, such creations as WEFT (Website Embedding Font Tool) and sIRF (Scalable Inman Flash Replacement) are programs that are meant to allow fonts to travel with their webpages to different computer screens. The overall purpose of these tools is essentially to embed fonts into a webpage to ensure that people see that page exactly as the web designer intended for it to be seen. This is important because it allows designers to maintain their typeface of choice and not have to worry about it becoming all discombobulated once their site is out there for the world to view.
So I was able to create SOMETHING in Dreamweaver. I did not however attempt to recreate my blog, I sorta just created my own page (on graffiti) to experiment and see what I was capable of. It took me about an hour and a half to two hours total to formulate my masterpiece. I was able to figure out out how to change the background color of my site, which was one of my questions last week. I have no clue how to put a picture of what I've created into my blog so I guess it will be a surprise (good or bad, probably bad) in class tonight. So I was able to use divs to insert pictures and text and all that good stuff. I used a 1 row, 3 column table to insert pictures as well. And instead of inserting a background color I inserted a picture for my site background. All of the pictures I used are from the internet though, not my own. All in all, this experience was a little less frustrating than the last but the prospect of creating a legitimate webpage is still overwhelming to me.
2: Elushika's Comment on my blog:
While she didn't suggest any changes for my blog, I would like to see if there's a possible way to resize my picture because Blogger resizes it (I assume because it's too big). Maybe this is something I could do in Photoshop.
3: Comments on other blogs:
I commented on the following classmates' blogs: Michael Goncalves, Ivana Morgan, & Kristin Cardo.
4: Reading Assignment-Fonts & the Web:
The average web surfer may not care what font they are reading when they visit a website. But this is a very important detail to many if not most designers. Typically, without web embedding tools, when someone visits a website the font would automatically change to a default setting on that particular computer and in most cases would not display the original font intended by that website's designer.
Well, such creations as WEFT (Website Embedding Font Tool) and sIRF (Scalable Inman Flash Replacement) are programs that are meant to allow fonts to travel with their webpages to different computer screens. The overall purpose of these tools is essentially to embed fonts into a webpage to ensure that people see that page exactly as the web designer intended for it to be seen. This is important because it allows designers to maintain their typeface of choice and not have to worry about it becoming all discombobulated once their site is out there for the world to view.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Assignment 3
Self-Education Week
Semantic Web
So in preparation for this weeks guest speaker, I've been trying to read up as much as possible on the Semantic web. It's pretty complicated and intricate stuff. Essentially, the idea (I think) is to develop a database where semantics, or symbols, can be developed and stored to include every single possible person, place, or thing in the world. Once these semantics are developed, web searching will be easier and faster, I suppose. The development of this information is intended to be done on an international scale so that searching for anything in any language is made easier and more organized. The idea of the semantic web and all of its embedded coding is supposed to look something like this diagram.
Ok, maybe I get a little better of an idea. But my self-educating process started to become overwhelming and complicated because I felt bombarded by the semantic web terminology. All of the 3 letter terms like URI, RDF, XML and so on began to form a huge blob in my mind and nothing made sense. Then again, I have little to no background on HTML and all of the website producing information. So I'm just gonna try not to think about how complicated this all seems and be a sponge during the guest lecture.
Question for Guest Speaker: Is there a projected time frame for which the Semantic Web is expected to be launced (a year, a decade) or is it more of a matter of making gradual changes to the existing web over time?
Dream Weaver
After last weeks lecture and demonstration of the fundamentals of Dreamweaver and a little self experimentation, I was able to repeat all of the procedures myself. Now, I do mean the very basics of Dreamweaver, like inserting text in the body, changing the font type and color, and dragging a picture into the body. I was able to remember how to do these things pretty quickly, not overly complicated stuff.
I was not ambitious enough to attempt to figure out how to actually turn what I've created into an actual webpage. This is something I am very interesting in learning to do however. Something I would also like to learn how to do is insert links in the webpage in order to categorize and break down information. For example, if I create a website for clothing, how do I create/insert the link or information into my Dreamweaver document in order to allow someone looking at my website to click on a link for Shirts? And how do you insert a background color (say I want my page to be purple, maybe with yellow polka dots)?
Okay, maybe I'm getting a little ahead of myself here. Again, I become overwhelmed by the answers to these questions so I'm going to leave it at that for now. Must practice.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Assignment 2
Paper Prototyping
After reviewing and considering the process of paper prototyping and what it entails, I have concluded that designers are less concerned with cost-cutting and failure of their product than they could potentially be. I say this because paper phototyping seems to be consistently shunned by designers when it is essentially a cost effective, time-saving, usability testing technique. This is the result of our technology driven world, where the most fitting motto seems to be "out with the old, in with the new". It seems to me that we would rather spend money on the most current technology to develop a website, software, hardware, what have you, than use an age-old process that's proven effective and costs virtually nothing. Well, apparently it just isn't cool to be cheap, or old.
Okay, so paper prototyping essentially involves building an interface (ultimately the surface of the product, the finished look) from scratch and without the help of current technology. The designer can test user friendliness by having an actual 'user' determine the usability rating. If it seems the product is too difficult for the average person, changes can be made to the design before it is launched to the public. All the while saving money by not using expensive technology to develop the interface and time, by being able to avoid creating and putting forth a product that will fail before it can be tested by the average consumer.
I like to think of paper prototyping as the vintage approach to designing. The thought of vintage clothing and comic books is appealing to us, for the most part. It's stylish. So why can't the same idea carry over to paper prototyping, instead of dubbing it as old and outdated? Why can't we feel satisfied and even dignified that we have the ability to create a design that is the same, and perhaps better, with few inexpensive resources than the most prime and current ones? It is almost as if it feels wrong to be doing so.
I also like to equate paper prototyping with the question: why is a new Yankee Stadium being built? Not because the "old", or current one is unusable and dilapidated. The stadium simply is not as new as it could possibly be so it's unacceptable. It's a relic, its walls are shrouded in history but its age renders it as being in need of renewal no matter what its state.
Essentially, with the option of paper phototyping, designers are ultimately deciding: do I want to use a method that's proven effective, saves money, and allows for changes to be made before being launched to ensure client satisfaction or use the most expensive design techology and take my chances on failure? Seems like the decision should be a no-brainer but [shrug]. If only paper prototyping could be thought of less as the approach your grandmother used to design, the process could prove to be an exceptional design tactic.
After reviewing and considering the process of paper prototyping and what it entails, I have concluded that designers are less concerned with cost-cutting and failure of their product than they could potentially be. I say this because paper phototyping seems to be consistently shunned by designers when it is essentially a cost effective, time-saving, usability testing technique. This is the result of our technology driven world, where the most fitting motto seems to be "out with the old, in with the new". It seems to me that we would rather spend money on the most current technology to develop a website, software, hardware, what have you, than use an age-old process that's proven effective and costs virtually nothing. Well, apparently it just isn't cool to be cheap, or old.Okay, so paper prototyping essentially involves building an interface (ultimately the surface of the product, the finished look) from scratch and without the help of current technology. The designer can test user friendliness by having an actual 'user' determine the usability rating. If it seems the product is too difficult for the average person, changes can be made to the design before it is launched to the public. All the while saving money by not using expensive technology to develop the interface and time, by being able to avoid creating and putting forth a product that will fail before it can be tested by the average consumer.
I like to think of paper prototyping as the vintage approach to designing. The thought of vintage clothing and comic books is appealing to us, for the most part. It's stylish. So why can't the same idea carry over to paper prototyping, instead of dubbing it as old and outdated? Why can't we feel satisfied and even dignified that we have the ability to create a design that is the same, and perhaps better, with few inexpensive resources than the most prime and current ones? It is almost as if it feels wrong to be doing so.I also like to equate paper prototyping with the question: why is a new Yankee Stadium being built? Not because the "old", or current one is unusable and dilapidated. The stadium simply is not as new as it could possibly be so it's unacceptable. It's a relic, its walls are shrouded in history but its age renders it as being in need of renewal no matter what its state.
Essentially, with the option of paper phototyping, designers are ultimately deciding: do I want to use a method that's proven effective, saves money, and allows for changes to be made before being launched to ensure client satisfaction or use the most expensive design techology and take my chances on failure? Seems like the decision should be a no-brainer but [shrug]. If only paper prototyping could be thought of less as the approach your grandmother used to design, the process could prove to be an exceptional design tactic.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Assignment 1
After brainstorming about the creative elements and informative content of various websites, I've compiled the following list of five that I find to be appealing and affecting and also what elements some of them could benefit from.
http://www.nymag.com/ This is the website for New York Magazine. At first, the site may appear extremely busy because most of the information covered in the magazine is on the front page, similar to The New York Times homepage. After a visit or two, it seems less overwhelming and the reads are worth it. The articles cover topics from fashion to politics to art and the writing is witty yet intelligent. The site and topics are appealing to a fairly large demographic, roughly 20-50 year olds, with blogs and articles about entertainment, economics, fashion and politics in a not-overly-political tone (I enjoy the articles for the most part and I'm not big on politics in general). The photography and graphics are also usually pretty interesting within the articles and on the homepage as well. To me, the site has a cool vintagey sort of feel, artsy in a comic book-like way.
http://www.foxnews.com/ This is a good news site. It is simple and easy to navigate, albeit a little boring. And sometimes several news stories will appear in a few different locations on just the homepage. Not a huge deal and I don't feel like it takes away from the informative content or the overall appearance of the website (which is basically white with a couple small images) but it's just something that I notice in visiting it daily. I think the overall site could use a bit more color so it doesn't appear so bland, but nothing over the top.
http://www.nymag.com/ This is the website for New York Magazine. At first, the site may appear extremely busy because most of the information covered in the magazine is on the front page, similar to The New York Times homepage. After a visit or two, it seems less overwhelming and the reads are worth it. The articles cover topics from fashion to politics to art and the writing is witty yet intelligent. The site and topics are appealing to a fairly large demographic, roughly 20-50 year olds, with blogs and articles about entertainment, economics, fashion and politics in a not-overly-political tone (I enjoy the articles for the most part and I'm not big on politics in general). The photography and graphics are also usually pretty interesting within the articles and on the homepage as well. To me, the site has a cool vintagey sort of feel, artsy in a comic book-like way.
http://www.feedyoursoulbusiness.com/ Feed Your Soul is a New Jersey based homebaked cookie company. The website has a very appealing simplicity to it. First of all, the designer used soft colors like browns, pinks and yellows which give the website an overall warm, inviting 
feeling (you can almost smell the cookies baking in the oven). The website is easy to navigate and organized very well. The tabs running across the top are perfectly informative and quickly point you in the right direction. The use of images of the actual products can be very enticing as well. And they truly make a darn good cookie!
http://www.themudtruck.com/ 
Mud is a popular self-described "gourmet street coffee" that is particulary popular in the lower east half of Manhattan. There are the Mud trucks, which commence mostly in the East Village, and there is a cafe there as well. This is the website based on the product. The graphics, and the logo in particular are well designed and the photos are creative. Again, I like the color scheme for this site. The designer utilized mostly warm subtle colors. Just looking at it is enough to give me a craving for a nice steamy cup o' joe. This site allows you to purchase products, view/listen to music from their cafe, and offers witty coffee "facts" (Buying a cup of coffee for the entire line is like God had just descended and bought a cup of coffee for the whole world.) The design offers subtlety along with a nice artsy, creative appearance. The principal downside to the website however, is that it doesn't offer much information as far as their products. No menus, nothing really on what the cafe offers, or special types of coffee can be viewed. So I'd say I specifically like this website for its creativity and art and not its information factor.
http://www.foxnews.com/ This is a good news site. It is simple and easy to navigate, albeit a little boring. And sometimes several news stories will appear in a few different locations on just the homepage. Not a huge deal and I don't feel like it takes away from the informative content or the overall appearance of the website (which is basically white with a couple small images) but it's just something that I notice in visiting it daily. I think the overall site could use a bit more color so it doesn't appear so bland, but nothing over the top.
http://www.empirecoffeetea.com/ Forget Starbucks, Empire Coffee is my java spot. There are two locations, one in Hell's Kitchen and one in Hoboken. The website is informative as far as their products, the company's history, and even the history of coffee. To me though, the website is not very aesthetically pleasing. I am not really a fan of the colors, I would use more warm tones like brown or maroon/dark red to correspond with the image/feeling of coffee. And I feel the the content is all cramped into the middle of the homepage. It would have a better appearance if it was more spread out, perhaps larger images, and maybe more of a boxy layout instead of the weird swervy design that the information is laid out in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
