Site Ratings & Reviews - Another critique please

Author

Another critique please

Always More Questions

2004-09-13, 4:16 am

I previously asked for a critique of
http://access-the-best-tickets.com/yankees3/

and appreciated the advise. I have since made the style sheet external
and have used an include for the menu (the teams menu) to make
http://access-the-best-tickets.com/yankees4/

I was hoping I could get some help. The menu now has to be positioned
manually at top: 72px; to get a semblence of balance. The menu is also
to the absolute right in yankees4 but in yankees3 the right edge of the
menu was even with the borders of the logo.

What am I doing wrong?

Also if someone would be kind enough to check this out in some (windows)
browsers

Thanks again

body
{
background-color: rgb(255,255,255);
color: rgb(243,1,45);
font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px;
border-bottom-width: 0px;
border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style:
none; border-bottom-style: none;
border-color: rgb(213,181,187);
}

#content
{
font-size: 90%;
background-color: rgb(255,255,255);
color: rgb(0,0,0);
border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px;
border-bottom-width: 0px;
border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style:
none; border-bottom-style: none;
padding: 22px 11px 22px 0px;
border-color: rgb(0,0,0);
text-align: left;
}

#footer
{
font-size: 70%;
background-color: rgb(255,255,255);
color: rgb(100,100,100);
border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px;
border-bottom-width: 0px;
border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style:
none; border-bottom-style: none;
padding: 0px 22px 0px 0px;
border-color: rgb(0,0,0);
text-align: center;
position: absolute;
bottom: 0;
right: 20%;
}

#disclaimer
{
font-size: 60%;
background-color: rgb(255,255,255);
color: rgb(100,100,100);
border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px;
border-bottom-width: 0px;
border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style:
none; border-bottom-style: none;
padding: 20px 0px 0px 0px;
border-color: rgb(154,22,46);
text-align: center;
}

#banner
{
/* background-color: rgb(213,183,189);
color: rgb(243,1,45); */
background-color: rgb(255,255,255);
color: rgb(243,1,45);
font-family: verdana, san-serif;
font-style: normal;
border-color: rgb(224,171,181);
}

a.banneritem
{
font-size: 67%;
background-color: rgb(154,22,46);
color: rgb(213,181,187);
font-variant: normal;
text-transform: none;
font-weight: bold;
margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 6px; margin-bottom: 6px;
border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px;
border-bottom-width: 0px;
border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style:
none; border-bottom-style: none;
border-color: rgb(0,0,0);
padding: 1px 0px 1px 0px;
text-align: center;
}

#menu
{
background-color: rgb(213,183,189);
color: rgb(243,1,45);
font-family: verdana, san-serif;
font-style: normal;
border-color: rgb(224,171,181);
}

a.menuitem
{
font-size: 67%;
background-color: rgb(154,22,46);
color: rgb(213,181,187);
font-variant: normal;
text-transform: none;
font-weight: bold;
margin-left: 4px; margin-right: 4px; margin-top: 4px; margin-bottom: 4px;
border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px;
border-bottom-width: 0px;
border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style:
none; border-bottom-style: none;
border-color: rgb(0,0,0);
padding: 0px 8px 0px 0px;
text-align: right;
}

#logo, #logo a
{
font-size: 135%;
background-color: rgb(255,255,255);
color: rgb(0,0,0);
font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;
font-style: normal;
font-variant: none;
text-transform: none;
font-weight: bold;
padding: 0px 0px 0px 0px;
border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style:
double; border-bottom-style: double;
border-color: rgb(154,22,46);
text-align: left;
text-indent: 20px;
}

#trail, #trail a
{
font-size: 89%;
background-color: rgb(255,255,255);
color: rgb(243,1,45);
font-style: italic;
font-variant: normal;
text-transform: none;
font-weight: normal;
border-left-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-top-width: 0px;
border-bottom-width: 0px;
border-left-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-top-style:
none; border-bottom-style: none;
padding: 4px 4px 4px 4px;
border-color: rgb(213,183,189);
text-align: right;
}

#content a
{
color: rgb(82,23,34);
text-decoration: underline;
}

#content a:hover, #content a:active
{
background-color: rgb(82,23,34);
color: rgb(255,255,255);
}

h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6
{
font-family: Verdana, san-serif;
font-style: normal;
font-variant: normal;
text-transform: none;
font-weight: bold;
}

h1
{
font-size: 136%;
text-align: right;
margin-top: 0%;
}

h2
{
font-size: 136%;
}

h3
{
font-size: 124%;
}

h4
{
font-size: 112%;
}

h5
{
font-size: 100%;
}

h6
{
font-size: 58%;
}

p {text-indent: 20px;}

#menu a
{
text-decoration: none;
}

..menuitem:hover
{
background-color: rgb(213,181,187);
color: rgb(154,22,46);
}

#banner a
{
text-decoration: none;
}

..banneritem:hover
{
background-color: rgb(213,181,187);
color: rgb(154,22,46);
}

#trail a
{
text-decoration: underline;
}

#logo a
{
text-decoration: none;
}

#trail a:hover
{
}

/* layout */
#banner {position: relative; top: 0; left: 0; float: left;
text-align: center;}
..banneritem {width: auto; display: block;}
#content {margin-left: 300px; margin-right: 20%; width: auto}
#menu {width: 20%; position: absolute; top: 72px; right: 0; float:
right; text-align: right;}
..menuitem {width: auto; display: block;}
#disclaimer {margin-left: 0px;}

@media print

{

#menu {display: none;}

#content {padding: 0px;}

#content a {text-decoration: underline;}

}

</style>

The Doormouse

2004-09-13, 12:17 pm

Always More Questions <thanIhaveanswersfor@domain.invalid> wrote:

> http://access-the-best-tickets.com/yankees4/

The menu at right overlaps the menu at top on my screen.

The Doormouse

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

kchayka

2004-09-13, 7:18 pm

Always More Questions wrote:
>
> http://access-the-best-tickets.com/yankees4/
>
> The menu now has to be positioned
> manually at top: 72px; to get a semblence of balance.

No, I don't think it does. In your stylesheet:
#menu {... position: absolute; ... float: right; ...}

Absolute positioning and floating are two different positioning methods,
they don't belong together. I suggest you keep the float and drop the
other positioning properties.
#menu {width:20%; float:right; text-align:right.}

If the menu doesn't sit exactly where you'd like it, set margin-top
(positive or negative) to adjust it. Setting margins in em units will
let it adapt with the text size, too.

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

Always More Questions

2004-09-13, 7:18 pm

In article <2qltpqF1117n9U1@uni-berlin.de>, kchayka <usenet@c-net.us>
wrote:

> Always More Questions wrote:
>
> No, I don't think it does. In your stylesheet:
> #menu {... position: absolute; ... float: right; ...}
>
> Absolute positioning and floating are two different positioning methods,
> they don't belong together. I suggest you keep the float and drop the
> other positioning properties.
> #menu {width:20%; float:right; text-align:right.}
>
> If the menu doesn't sit exactly where you'd like it, set margin-top
> (positive or negative) to adjust it. Setting margins in em units will
> let it adapt with the text size, too.

Thanks. That brings it back to the way it looked in yankees3.

Now if I could just figure how to make the disclaimer center in the
middle "column" and lined up with the bottom of the teams menu (bottom
of text with bottom of menu)

Thanks again.

kchayka

2004-09-13, 7:18 pm

Always More Questions wrote:
>
>
> Now if I could just figure how to make the disclaimer center in the
> middle "column" and lined up with the bottom of the teams menu (bottom
> of text with bottom of menu)

The disclaimer is in a strange position within the source. As long as it
remains where it is, you may be stuck.

But it really belongs at the bottom (just before </body> ), methinks, at
least that's where it makes more sense to me when the page is viewed
without stylesheets. If you relocate it there, you can position it below
everything via clear:both, then use a negative top margin (-3em) to move
it up a tad. Left/right margins will keep it clear of the sidebars.

If you do this, I suggest adding some bottom padding to the content area
(at least 3ems) to make sure there is space for the disclaimer.
Otherwise you might have overlapping text when there is a lot of content.

> Thanks again.

In the future, I suggest you post CSS questions to the stylesheets
newsgroup rather than here. That's what that group is for, and there is
a lot more talent over there: comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets

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

2004-09-14, 12:18 pm

"kchayka" <usenet@c-net.us> wrote in message
news:2qmhp6F118j5nU1@uni-berlin.de...
> Always More Questions wrote:
>
> The disclaimer is in a strange position within the source. As long as it
> remains where it is, you may be stuck.
>
> But it really belongs at the bottom (just before </body> ), methinks, at
> least that's where it makes more sense to me when the page is viewed
> without stylesheets. If you relocate it there, you can position it below
> everything via clear:both, then use a negative top margin (-3em) to move
> it up a tad. Left/right margins will keep it clear of the sidebars.
>
> If you do this, I suggest adding some bottom padding to the content area
> (at least 3ems) to make sure there is space for the disclaimer.
> Otherwise you might have overlapping text when there is a lot of content.
>
>
> In the future, I suggest you post CSS questions to the stylesheets
> newsgroup rather than here. That's what that group is for, and there is
> a lot more talent over there: comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets
>
> --
> Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
> Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

look at the space you wasted not just in the menu on the right side
but all over, even your coding is bloated. why have you left all that space
in the html ? do you not realise that browsers read from left to right then
drop a line then repeat the entire process ? you have blank lines, why have
you done this ?

please tell me, is this the best that you can do ? have you had any training
at all ?
don't tell me, you just like to call yourself a "Computer Programer" right ?
well think again. you aint, and never will be with work like that

goo day to you sir

2004-09-14, 12:18 pm

0 wrote:

Hmmm. Thinks. Ah yes, 0 is actually replying to the original poster, not to
kchayka.

Next time reply to the post you are replying to, not the last one in your
"newsreader".

> even your coding is bloated. why have you left all that space
> in the html ? do you not realise that browsers read from left to right
then
> drop a line then repeat the entire process ? you have blank lines, why
have
> you done this ?

What on earth, or elsewhere for that matter, are you talking about.

The layout of the HTML has no impact at all on the layout of the web page.
As it should not.

The HTML can be layed out with as much spacing as required, even more in
fact, so as to make it very easily readable by authors.

The browser will condense all that whitespace, as it should and does.

> please tell me, is this the best that you can do ? have you had any
training
> at all ?

Er, have you? Your portfolio?

> don't tell me, you just like to call yourself a "Computer Programer" right
?

Computer programming has absolutely nothing to do with authoring for the
web. They are two totally dissimilar fields, much as computer programming
bears no resemblance at all to desktop publishing. So you have just put your
second foot into your mouth.

> well think again. you aint, and never will be with work like that

Ho Hummm. I for one think the OP's site is not too bad. Not outstanding but
not actually too bad. A whole lot better than a lot of the rubbish that is
offered up here for critique.

Where is your site?

> goo day to you sir

Er goo day to you as well sire.
--
Cheers
Richard. :-)

Neal

2004-09-14, 12:18 pm

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 11:38:41 GMT, rf <rf@.invalid> wrote:

> 0 wrote:
>
> training
>
> Er, have you? Your portfolio?

Gotta love folks who come in here swinging a bat on post one or two. I
usually assume they're either trolls or very disturbed.

>
> Er goo day to you as well sire.

Hap-py Goo Day to yoooou! (whistle and clap)

2004-09-14, 7:17 pm

"Neal" <neal413@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:opsebitht06v6656@news.individual.net...
> On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 11:38:41 GMT, rf <rf@.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> Gotta love folks who come in here swinging a bat on post one or two. I
> usually assume they're either trolls or very disturbed.
>
>
> Hap-py Goo Day to yoooou! (whistle and clap)

yeah i thought as much,
just because it's my first post and i don't happen to agree with you
bunch of ..... it's attack time is it ?

that's ok with me, i'll be here and posting my comments as and when
i feel the need to do so.

C.W.

2004-09-14, 7:17 pm

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 11:14:37 +0000 (UTC), "0" <0@0.sk> wrote:

>look at the space you wasted not just in the menu on the right side
>but all over, even your coding is bloated. why have you left all that space
>in the html ? do you not realise that browsers read from left to right then
>drop a line then repeat the entire process ? you have blank lines, why have
>you done this ?

All the above probably explained a little bit below.

In terms of load time; I doubt it adds that much.

>please tell me, is this the best that you can do ? have you had any training
>at all ?

The person stated, in another thread, that this is their first attempt
converting over to using CSS and is in rough draft stages as the edges
are smoothed out.

Is this the best they can do? Not yet but that's why they are asking
for critiques as the site goes through stages in development. This is
their second critique request in less than a month. Who knows what
their potential is _since_ this is their first time tinkering with
something new. The blank lines are probably there for the author's
ease at the moment and they may have planned on removing most/all of
those as the pages tighten up/edges become much smoother.

>don't tell me, you just like to call yourself a "Computer Programer" right ?
>well think again. you aint, and never will be with work like that

One thing doesn't have anything to do with the other - no matter how
it is tried to be explained. There are computer programmers that only
tinker with HTML and CSS in their spare time.

Carol

Neal

2004-09-14, 7:17 pm

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 18:02:07 +0000 (UTC), 0 <0@0.sk> wrote:

>
> "Neal" <neal413@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:opsebitht06v6656@news.individual.net...
>
> yeah i thought as much,
> just because it's my first post and i don't happen to agree with you
> bunch of ..... it's attack time is it ?

Oh, please. This was nothing.

Welcome to the group.

Chris Beall

2004-09-14, 7:17 pm

0 wrote:
>
> look at the space you wasted not just in the menu on the right side
> but all over, even your coding is bloated. why have you left all that space
> in the html ? do you not realise that browsers read from left to right then
> drop a line then repeat the entire process ? you have blank lines, why have
> you done this ?

O,
I think there are two issues here. The first is with regard to efficient
use of real estate within the browser window. While there is no
computing cost to empty real estate on the window, a page with too much
blank space, particularly if it is unbalanced, can appear wasteful or
unattractive to the visitor.

However, when I looked at the Home page of the subject site, I didn't
see such a problem. I used a window size of 600 X 800 and there seemed
to be content everywhere I looked. To explore the issue further, I
increased my window size to 1280 X 1024. At that size, the bottom, oh,
20% was blank, and there was significant white space between the bottom
of the center-column text and the footer. The content, however, was
still pretty evenly balanced across the area from the top of the window
to the bottom of the footer. I had not changed the text size, however,
which made it hard to read at the larger window size, so I next
compensated by increasing text size to 200%. With that change made, the
screen was again filled with content, with no significant empty space.
Naturally, this leaves me somewhat puzzled as to what you meant by "the
space you wasted...". Perhaps it has something to do with window or font
size, but I could not reproduce what you seem to be referring to.

The second issue is the size of the HTML file transmitted from the
server to the client. Unnecessary characters in this file can, as you
pointed out, increase transmission time. You focus on blank lines, which
the author has inserted to improve readability (for him; users don't
generally read the HTML). Some people choose to run their HTML through a
compressor which strips out all comments, blank lines, and multiple
spaces, to reduce transmission size. The downside is that it makes it
harder for anyone at the client side to READ the HTML. Usually that's no
problem, but folks in this newsgroup certainly do a lot of that kind of
reading and would not, IMO, appreciate compression.

Is this really wasteful? The total size of the HTML file is 13,784
bytes. Some lines are indented by adding leading spaces; I counted about
255 of these. Some lines are split by adding an extra Carriage Return
(to put attributes on their own line); I counted about 8. There are some
comments, including commented-out tags; I counted about 203 characters.
Finally, there are the blank lines you pointed out, each of which
represents one Carriage Return character in the file; I counted 79 of
these. Adding all that up gives us about 545 characters that do not
contribute to the page as displayed by the browser. (We could also
eliminate the Carriage Return at the end of each line, but that would
make the HTML quite unreadable, so I'm not doing that for this exercise).

So, 545 excess characters in a 13,784-byte file is a waste of 3.9%.

Of course, that's not the whole story. The page includes an image as
well as the text. The image is 35,796 bytes in size. Thus to display the
page, we must transmit 49,580 bytes (plus header information we can't
control). The extra 545 bytes are therefore about 1% of the total.

Is a 1% penalty justification for compressing HTML before placing it on
the server? Opinions will differ, but I'd rather have readable HTML sent
all the way to the client. Perhaps I'm biased because I learn lots of
techniques by looking at what others have done.

Regards,
Chris Beall

Always More Questions

2004-09-14, 11:15 pm

In article <ci6jqt$rur$1@hercules.btinternet.com>, "0" <0@0.sk> wrote:

> "kchayka" <usenet@c-net.us> wrote in message
> news:2qmhp6F118j5nU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>

For your edification I am the OP

> look at the space you wasted not just in the menu on the right side
> but all over,

could you be more specific (and by that I mean could you actually post
an example and explain how you would make it better)

even your coding is bloated.

could you be more specific (and by that I mean could you actually post
an example and explain how you would make it better)

> why have you left all that space in the html ?

It's an XXXXXXX trap...what took you so long

do you not realise that browsers read from left to right then
> drop a line then repeat the entire process ?

Browsers "read", I thought they "parsed" the code.

> you have blank lines, why have you done this ?

It's an XXXXXXX trap...what took you so long

>
> please tell me, is this the best that you can do ?

Why should I tell you that? In any event my worst page is better than
your best page.

> have you had any training at all ?

At least I know where the question mark belongs

> don't tell me, you just like to call yourself a "Computer Programer" right ?

Getting from web design to computer programmer is an interesting leap.
Let me guess, you call yourself a computer programmer? (notice the
correct placement of the question mark without wasting all of that
space.)

> well think again. you aint, and never will be with work like that

Thank you for your well thought out critique.

>
> goo day to you sir
>
>
>
>

I would never discuss your diapers

2004-09-14, 11:15 pm

0 wrote:

> yeah i thought as much,
> just because it's my first post and i don't happen to agree with you
> bunch of ..... it's attack time is it ?
>
> that's ok with me, i'll be here and posting my comments as and when
> i feel the need to do so.

Your Shift key is broken :-)

--
Cheers
Richard.

Always More Questions

2004-09-14, 11:15 pm

In article <zZI1d.2379$Qv5.1285@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>,
Chris Beall <Chris_Beall@prodigy.net> wrote:

> However, when I looked at the Home page of the subject site, I didn't
> see such a problem. I used a window size of 600 X 800 and there seemed
> to be content everywhere I looked. To explore the issue further, I
> increased my window size to 1280 X 1024. At that size, the bottom, oh,
> 20% was blank, and there was significant white space between the bottom
> of the center-column text and the footer.

Thanks for the support. I've been trying to figure out how to make the
footer "float" about .5 inch below the team menu, but haven't got that
yet. (personally I'd also like to figure out how to make the top and
bottom borders be the same length as the text, but figure what the hell
it's going to be screwed up on someones browser anyway.)

2004-09-14, 11:15 pm

0 wrote

> ok you want detail:

Why don't you learn to post correctly. Trimming what is not relevant to your
reply would be a good start.

> explain this mumbling
>
> spaces or large gaps in the html will "natually" prevent the page from
> loading as quick as possible, spaces in the actual layout as seen, just
make
> the page look tacky, in my opinion. it's a sign of a novice.

Oh bullshit. How many spaces and large gaps to you see? Even if you see a
thousand of them that would be completely swamped by stuffing up the
compression on even *one* image, as has happened: That big image at the left
of the OP's page: its 35K. That could be quite easily reduced to 20K with
little loss of detail leaving a potential 15 thousand bytes available for
HTML layout.

Look at this another way. That thousand bytes will cost about 0.1 cents to
download. If the page is downloaded one thousand times a week that is $1 per
week. Now, if the OP has to pay a web author to update the page, and that
author has to spend an additional hour wading through badly laid out HTML
then that will cost the OP upwards of $50.

>
> but who is compiling the code ? you, or the browser ?

HTML is *not* compiled. One of your basic mistakes. HTML is parsed.

And who is amending the code next week. Me or the browser?

>
> wasted time, slower loading.

Baseless assumptions. See above.

> use the correct method which is the comment out tags
> not just blank lines that serve no purpose at all.
> what are they for anyway ?

See above.

>
> what's it you ? mind your own business.
> when i want a person like you to look at my work
> then i'll know it's time to retire.

I simply want to know if you have sufficient web authoring skills to back up
your comments above. The default asumption is that you do not.

> web

> you need to think about my reasoning for mentioning this in the first
place.
> judging by your attitude you missed my point entirely.

No, I did not. You have missed the point by comparing web authoring to
computer programming. I could just as easily compare web authoring to flower
arranging or decoupage *and* be closer to the truth as web authoring is
mainly about arranging text and images on a web page.

>
> again, mind your own business,
> what's your bank account details.

What do bank account details have to to with web pages? Oh, you want to
deposit some mone in one of my accounts?

--
Cheers
Richard.