Site Ratings & Reviews - More Appaling Crap?

Author

More Appaling Crap?

cruiserweight

2004-05-15, 7:28 am

While I couldn't be bothered to go back on the last site
(www.redraid.com.kh, complete with "atrocious code", I agree), this
group -- or one similar -- has shown me the error of my ways. So
please give me some feedback on this little restaurant site -- no
tables, just validated xhtml and css.

http://www.k4media.com/veiyo/

thanks in advance.

jake

2004-05-15, 7:28 am

In message <18bdba0a.0405150112.134e2f57@posting.google.com>,
cruiserweight <bayon86@yahoo.com> writes
>While I couldn't be bothered to go back on the last site
>(www.redraid.com.kh, complete with "atrocious code", I agree), this
>group -- or one similar -- has shown me the error of my ways. So
>please give me some feedback on this little restaurant site -- no
>tables, just validated xhtml and css.
>
>http://www.k4media.com/veiyo/
>
>thanks in advance.

Running through all the pages it:
(a) Looks fine, and
(b) Sounds fine.

Very attractive layout and colour scheme.

A site that's certainly easy to navigate, with an interesting and
comprehensive content.

Two (very minor) suggestions regarding people who listen to the site:
(a) Let the <title></title> reflect the content of the *page* and not
just a general title for the overall site
(b) Check the price list and ensure that there's no 'space' between the
dollar and the amount. My (talking) browser did make occasional
references to 'dollar ten o'clock', 'dollar two o'clock', etc. instead
of 'ten dollars', 'two dollars' ;-)

regards.

--
Jake

Els

2004-05-15, 7:28 am

cruiserweight wrote:

> While I couldn't be bothered to go back on the last site
> (www.redraid.com.kh, complete with "atrocious code", I agree), this
> group -- or one similar -- has shown me the error of my ways. So
> please give me some feedback on this little restaurant site -- no
> tables, just validated xhtml and css.
>
> http://www.k4media.com/veiyo/
>
> thanks in advance.

To prevent slipping off screen in Gecko browsers when the
window is narrower than your page, put a border around the
page, or (thanks Duende ;-) ) add min-width: (the width of
your page) to the body style.

Nice pages, pretty colour, pleasant view :-)

--
Els
http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

Els

2004-05-15, 7:28 am

Els wrote:
[color=darkred]
> cruiserweight wrote:
>

One little mistake (I think):
on the 'about us' page:

<p>With the new name came a new and expanded menu. To the
pastas and pizzas Neth added traditional Khmer specialties
like vegetable curry and fish amok, long ordered but never
formally on the
menu.</p>http://localhost/veiyoTonle/contact.html

<p>In 2002,...

I'm sure that http address shouldn't be there?

--
Els
http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2004-05-15, 5:30 pm

Quoth the raven cruiserweight:

> While I couldn't be bothered to go back on the last site
> (www.redraid.com.kh, complete with "atrocious code", I agree), this

Why not? You don't like motorcycling? <g>

> group -- or one similar -- has shown me the error of my ways. So
> please give me some feedback on this little restaurant site -- no
> tables, just validated xhtml and css.
>
> http://www.k4media.com/veiyo/

I love that beautiful aqua background color...

Oh wait. That is /my/ browser's default background color! You haven't
specified one. Hint: whenever you specify a color, specify a
background as well, even if it is transparent.

body {
font-family : verdana, arial, sans-serif;
font-size : 80%;
color : #669900;
Add:
background-color: #f5f5f5;

Since I don't have Verdana, I get Arial so small I can't read it.
Drop:
Verdana
http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html

font-family : Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size : 100%;

...and consider getting rid of most of the px measurements in favor of
em units, so the page will scale properly when I increase the font
size so I can read it.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

The Doormouse

2004-05-15, 5:30 pm

bayon86@yahoo.com (cruiserweight) wrote:

> http://www.k4media.com/veiyo/

The color choice is poor and your text scrolls off the screen at 800x600.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

jake

2004-05-15, 5:30 pm

In message <zHopc.190233$M3.188563@twister.nyroc.rr.com>, Beauregard T.
Shagnasty <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> writes
>Quoth the raven cruiserweight:
>
>
>Why not? You don't like motorcycling? <g>
>
>
>I love that beautiful aqua background color...
>
>Oh wait. That is /my/ browser's default background color! You haven't
>specified one. Hint: whenever you specify a color, specify a background
>as well, even if it is transparent.
>
>body {
> font-family : verdana, arial, sans-serif;
> font-size : 80%;
> color : #669900;
>Add:
> background-color: #f5f5f5;
>
>Since I don't have Verdana, I get Arial so small I can't read it.
>Drop:
> Verdana
>http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html
>
> font-family : Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
> font-size : 100%;
>
>..and consider getting rid of most of the px measurements in favor of
>em units, so the page will scale properly when I increase the font size
>so I can read it.
>
It's not really a Verdana problem, but a problem of:

(a) Specifying the body text as 80% rather than 100%; I have Verdana,
but the 80% makes it smaller than optimum -- for my set-up, that is.

(b) Specifying Arial as a fall-back in the absence of Verdana. A better
choice would have been:

font-size : 100%;
font-family: Verdana, Tahoma, "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;

These are similar-size fonts, and Tahoma should be present on all
Windows machines since Win95.

regards.

--
Jake

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2004-05-15, 5:30 pm

Quoth the raven jake:

> In message <zHopc.190233$M3.188563@twister.nyroc.rr.com>, Beauregard T.
> Shagnasty <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> writes
>
> It's not really a Verdana problem, but a problem of:

Yes it is. <g> Verdana is too wide. Did you read Stephen Poley's
page? Verdana is the reason all these authors choose less than 100%
font sizes, because it looks too wide at 100% on their own machines.

> (a) Specifying the body text as 80% rather than 100%; I have Verdana,
> but the 80% makes it smaller than optimum -- for my set-up, that is.

I actually do have Verdana, and was making a point, but even 80%
Verdana is too small. 80% Arial is atrocious.

> (b) Specifying Arial as a fall-back in the absence of Verdana. A better
> choice would have been:
>
> font-size : 100%;
> font-family: Verdana, Tahoma, "Trebuchet MS", sans-serif;
>
> These are similar-size fonts, and Tahoma should be present on all
> Windows machines since Win95.

None of these are as wide as Verdana...

font-family: "Trebuchet MS", Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
....would be better... or ... sans-serif only.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

kchayka

2004-05-16, 4:29 am

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

> Quoth the raven jake:
>
>
> I actually do have Verdana, and was making a point, but even 80%
> Verdana is too small. 80% Arial is atrocious.

And I don't have Verdana, so it's 80% of whatever I do end up with. 80%
is tolerable for snippets of text, but it's so not readable for large
amounts of text.
[color=darkred]

A better choice would be
font-family: sans-serif;

Why not let the user get their own preference, eh? Doesn't anybody
besides me get sick of seeing Arial everywhere?

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

jake

2004-05-18, 7:42 pm

In message <K0vpc.37904$hY.155@twister.nyroc.rr.com>, Beauregard T.
Shagnasty <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> writes
>Quoth the raven jake:
>
>
>Yes it is. <g> Verdana is too wide.
Not really; perhaps about 20% wider than, say, Arial. It seems wider
because it uses a wider inter-character space. According to the author,
this is done to make the text more readable at all sizes.

>Did you read Stephen Poley's page?

Ah yes -- the oft quoted Stephen Poley's page -- beloved of
Verdana-phobes everywhere ;-)

My default set-up likes Verdana at 100%, so his examples don't make too
much sense when I look at the page.

>Verdana is the reason all these authors choose less than 100% font
>sizes, because it looks too wide at 100% on their own machines.

Because their machines aren't set up so that Verdana at 100% is the norm
-- hence Arial is going to look 'normal' and Verdana too big.
>
>
>I actually do have Verdana, and was making a point, but even 80%
>Verdana is too small. 80% Arial is atrocious.

I find 80% smaller than I'd like, but not so small that I can't read it.
>
>
>None of these are as wide as Verdana...

True, but Tahoma is pretty much a 'cousin' of Verdana and so is a good
substitute.
>
>font-family: "Trebuchet MS", Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
>...would be better... or ... sans-serif only.
>
Or maybe no font-family at all? I don't think there's any real
'one-solution-fits-all'.

regards.

--
Jake