This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters  


Home > Archive > Site Ratings & Reviews > April 2005 > Re: new site, please comment





You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread. To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to this thread please [click here]

Author Re: new site, please comment
Barbara de Zoete

2005-03-28, 11:25 pm

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:36:01 +0200, Dano <danielXYZrijs@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I've recently changed the complete site I had from those horrible frames to
> a CSS-website.
>
> link: http://www.ltvborgharen.nl
>


WRAAHH! What's with that splash page? Why? There is hardly anybody who likes
needing to click again after they thought they might have found something
useful. Also, you have no control over where a visitor enters the page. People
comming to you through search engines will hardly ever start at the top of your
domain. They'll start at one of the content pages.

I don't understand the dim and somewhat dull colors. I always would think brick
red and Wimbledon green would do good with a tennis site. What's with the grays?

I think your font size is set too small.

It's a good thing you moved away from frames, but it's a pitty you moved towards
another flawed design method, being abusing tables for layout: go for a
tableless design
<http://groups.google.com/groups?as_...w.authoring.%2A>
and <http://www.google.com/search?q=%20tableless+design%20>.

Why on earth do you fix the width of the design? There is nothing (like a
copmlex graphic that is _content_) in your pages that makes that desirable.
Think of how many different viewport sizes are possible (over 800.000). You
cater for only a few: read on liquid or fluid design
<http://groups.google.com/groups?as_...w.authoring.%2A>
and <http://www.google.com/search?q=liquid+OR+fluid+design>.

Why are menu items that show the page you're on, still alive?

Why is the title (some simple text with a logo next to it) all image?

Images that are not relevant as content (such as special bullets) are better
left without a value for the [alt] attribute, since (if someone has no images
available) it is odd to have tennisbal home tennisbal over ltv tennisbal
competitie on your screen.

> I've checked the site for the HTML 4.01 transitional and the CSS-check as
> well.
>


On the W3C valid logo:
Firstly, not all pages that carry that 'badge of honour' are valid actually
<http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=h...comodatie.shtml>.
Secondly, since it is the one bit that has color, it stands out. But it is
also the bit which has no relevance for a visitor what so ever. There is no
message you convay. To speak our mothers tongue: het zal ze werkelijk worst zijn
of een pagina valideert of niet.

There are a few irregularities you do on every page, like the error in syntax
when inserting an empty element (<img/> <br/> ). The slash is not supposed to be
there with html 4.01 transitional.
I don't understand why you use transitional. Since it is a new design, you
should have tried strict. The transition period ended somewhere mid to late
nineties.

Over all, I'd say it's a proper attempt. But a somewhat dull and mediocre result.

> --
> Dan
>


Your sig(nature) separator is broken.

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
mbstevens

2005-03-28, 11:25 pm

Dano wrote:

> I've recently changed the complete site I had from those
> horrible frames to a CSS-website.
>
> link: http://www.ltvborgharen.nl
>
> The site is about a (small) dutch tennisclub for which I
> maintain this site free of charge. Please give me your
> views and comments on this site regarding readability
> (even if you don't speak dutch :-), visibility,
> clickability, etc etc
>
> I've checked the site for the HTML 4.01 transitional and
> the CSS-check as well.
>
> All comments are welcome
>
> --
> Dan


I'd get rid of the splash page. If the club members
*insist* on a big logo, put it beneath those left hand
links.

Use lists of links (since they are, in fact, lists),
styled in CSS with something like:
ul{
background: transparent;
color: #000;
border: 0px;
text-align:left;
list-style-type:disc;
list-style-position:outside;
list-style-image:url(img/kleinebal_open.gif) !important;}
li {
color:#000;
background: transparent;
list-style-position:outside;
margin-bottom: 5px;
width:60%;}
____________
then in markup
_____________
<ul>
<li><a....></a></li>
........
</ul>
__________
Note that the <ul> does not have to be contained in a
<div>. It is a block level item that can stand on
its own. The page, as it stands, suffers from both
div-itis and table-itis.

Anytime you use <br />, think hard. Is this something
that could be done in the style sheet? Am I using the
wrong kind of tag to mark up the item?
--
mbstevens http://www.mbstevens.com

Dano

2005-03-30, 12:08 am

I'm working on the redesign after your comments (fluid etc).
But why is my site showing OK in IE and bad in Opera and Mozilla. Especially
positioning of the
navigation and the content. Please look only on:
http://www.ltvborgharen.nl/home.shtml as I'm still remaking the rest (some
work, some don't)

regards
Dan


Dano

2005-03-30, 12:08 am


"Barbara de Zoete" <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:opsocrzjztx5vgts@zoete_b...
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:36:01 +0200, Dano <danielXYZrijs@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> WRAAHH! What's with that splash page? Why? There is hardly anybody who
> likes needing to click again after they thought they might have found
> something useful. Also, you have no control over where a visitor enters
> the page. People comming to you through search engines will hardly ever
> start at the top of your domain. They'll start at one of the content
> pages.


I will change that. There's no specific reason for the splash page, other
than having the counter on it.

> I don't understand the dim and somewhat dull colors. I always would think
> brick red and Wimbledon green would do good with a tennis site. What's
> with the grays?


Working on that (more clay now ;-))

> I think your font size is set too small.


In layout.css the font-size is set to 100%. Isn't this the way the have it?
All fonts are adjustable on the site.

> It's a good thing you moved away from frames, but it's a pitty you moved
> towards another flawed design method, being abusing tables for layout: go
> for a tableless design
> <http://groups.google.com/groups?as_...w.authoring.%2A>
> and <http://www.google.com/search?q=%20tableless+design%20>.


Working on the tables, but it takes some more work and reading.

When is it OK to have a table? Reading about it shows that tables are used
for tabular data (duh). Is the kalender I use tabular data
(http://www.ltvborgharen.nl/kalender2005.shtml)?

> Why on earth do you fix the width of the design? There is nothing (like a
> copmlex graphic that is _content_) in your pages that makes that
> desirable. Think of how many different viewport sizes are possible (over
> 800.000). You cater for only a few: read on liquid or fluid design
> <http://groups.google.com/groups?as_...w.authoring.%2A>
> and <http://www.google.com/search?q=liquid+OR+fluid+design>.


Partially fixed to fluids, but doesn't work ok in FF and Opera (only in IE).
Any suggestions what I'm doing wrong?

> Why are menu items that show the page you're on, still alive?


What do you mean? If you've click on e.g. "Accomodatie", that you can click
on it again? If that's your question, then this is meant to be, because the
underlying pages in "Accomodatie" all have the same nav_accomodatie.html
subpage. This way people can click back to the "main accomodatie" page.

>
> Why is the title (some simple text with a logo next to it) all image?


Wanted to change that, but couldn't manage (yet) to have the text correctly
vertically aligned (middle).

> Images that are not relevant as content (such as special bullets) are
> better left without a value for the [alt] attribute, since (if someone
> has no images available) it is odd to have tennisbal home tennisbal over
> ltv tennisbal competitie on your screen.


fixed

>
> On the W3C valid logo:
> Firstly, not all pages that carry that 'badge of honour' are valid
> actually
> <http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=h...comodatie.shtml>.


I'll scroll to the pages once more for these smaller issues

> Secondly, since it is the one bit that has color, it stands out. But it
> is also the bit which has no relevance for a visitor what so ever. There
> is no message you convay. To speak our mothers tongue: het zal ze
> werkelijk worst zijn of een pagina valideert of niet.


Dat is ook very true. I just leave it temporarily until my pages are
complete (and checked). After that I'll remove it.

>
> There are a few irregularities you do on every page, like the error in
> syntax when inserting an empty element (<img/> <br/> ). The slash is not
> supposed to be there with html 4.01 transitional.
> I don't understand why you use transitional. Since it is a new design,
> you should have tried strict. The transition period ended somewhere mid
> to late nineties.


Switched to strict

>
> Over all, I'd say it's a proper attempt. But a somewhat dull and mediocre
> result.


Well....í'm just a simple amateur trying to do a bit for the local sportclub
in a small village. I guess not one visitor of the club will have any clue
what happens on the pages ("behind the scenes"). It's more for my own
learning to have a "proper" page set up.

just working along....

regards
Dan


Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2005-03-30, 12:08 am

Dano wrote:

> "Barbara de Zoete" <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
> news:opsocrzjztx5vgts@zoete_b...
>
>
> In layout.css the font-size is set to 100%. Isn't this the way the
> have it? All fonts are adjustable on the site.


...but in presentation.css, you have:

body { font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;
color: black;
font-size: 90%;
}

...and I don't see sizes in layout.css.

Couple other tips: in the css are numerous colour settings, such as
p.green { color: green; }
p.blue { color: blue; }

What will you do if next month the client wants you to change green
parts to .. blue, and the blue parts to green?

p.green { color: blue; }
p.blue { color: green; } ?

Recommend using class names that indicate the feeling, rather than the
result:

p.soft { color: green; }
p.cool { color: blue; }
p.sharp { color: silver; }
p.hot { color: red; } etc.

You should also add a background: transparent to any place you set a
foreground colour.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
Dano

2005-03-30, 12:08 am


"Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> schreef in bericht
news:bYk2e.125319$H05.90591@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> Dano wrote:
>
>
> ..but in presentation.css, you have:
>
> body { font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;
> color: black;
> font-size: 90%;
> }
>
> ..and I don't see sizes in layout.css.


Oops, my mistake. It's indeed only of course in presenation.css. I've
changed it to 100%

> Couple other tips: in the css are numerous colour settings, such as
> p.green { color: green; }
> p.blue { color: blue; }
>
> What will you do if next month the client wants you to change green parts
> to .. blue, and the blue parts to green?
>
> p.green { color: blue; }
> p.blue { color: green; } ?
>
> Recommend using class names that indicate the feeling, rather than the
> result:
>
> p.soft { color: green; }
> p.cool { color: blue; }
> p.sharp { color: silver; }
> p.hot { color: red; } etc.


It's more of a css-way to have different colors in the site. Is there a
neath way to do this within the html of the site itself?

> You should also add a background: transparent to any place you set a
> foreground colour.


Done

> --
> -bts
> -This space intentionally left blank.


thanks for the comments

Dan


Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2005-03-30, 12:08 am

Dano wrote:
> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> schreef in
> bericht news:bYk2e.125319$H05.90591@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
> Oops, my mistake. It's indeed only of course in presenation.css.
> I've changed it to 100%


Ok...

>
> It's more of a css-way to have different colors in the site. Is
> there a neath way to do this within the html of the site itself?


The point is you don't want the HTML to read:
<p class="green">Text here...</p>
and display blue text. Calling the class "green" is essentially the
same as putting the presentation in the HTML.

Similar to: p.bold ( font-style: italic; }
and <p class="bold">This is italic text</p>

>
> Done


...except you need to spell it correctly, else it will be ignored. <g>
[ "transparant;" ] and it should also be added to all the other colour
settings as well.

> thanks for the comments


Welcome.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
Nico Schuyt

2005-03-30, 12:08 am

Dano wrote:
> link: http://www.ltvborgharen.nl


If, like you say, you are a simple amateur, it's very well built.
Clean, easy to read and to navigate. Compliments!
Some remarks:
- Don't scale pictures in HTML (Like the
http://www.ltvborgharen.nl/pics/game1.JPG) The result is ugly. Use a picture
editor instead.
- There's a problem with the sponsors page (IE:
http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/test/ltv.png ) and the sitemap
- The presentation.css has an error ('backgroud')
- Try to give the guestbook the same layout as the rest of the site.

Good luck!

--
Nico
http://www.nicoschuyt.nl



Dano

2005-03-30, 12:09 am

>
>
> ..except you need to spell it correctly, else it will be ignored. <g>
> [ "transparant;" ] and it should also be added to all the other colour
> settings as well.


it's getting late ;-)

If I add the transparent to the css, my clay background is gone. How do I
correct this?

Dan


Dano

2005-03-30, 12:09 am


"Nico Schuyt" <nschuyt@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:4249e34d$0$86535$dbd49001@news.euronet.nl...
> Dano wrote:
>
> If, like you say, you are a simple amateur, it's very well built.
> Clean, easy to read and to navigate. Compliments!


Thanks, I'm learning every time ;-) My next step is design without tables...

> Some remarks:
> - Don't scale pictures in HTML (Like the
> http://www.ltvborgharen.nl/pics/game1.JPG) The result is ugly. Use a
> picture
> editor instead.


Will do

> - There's a problem with the sponsors page (IE:
> http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/test/ltv.png ) and the sitemap


You're right. I was just at that time fixing those pages. Now they should be
fine.

> - The presentation.css has an error ('backgroud')


fixed

> - Try to give the guestbook the same layout as the rest of the site.


Hmm.. this is more difficult, because it's an outside link. Any suggestions
how to create an own simple guestbook are very welcome!

>
> Good luck!


thanks
Dan


Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2005-03-30, 12:09 am

Dano wrote:
> it's getting late ;-)
>
> If I add the transparent to the css, my clay background is gone.
> How do I correct this?


Naturally, you do not add "transparent" to anyplace where you DO want
a background colour to show, such as the body { }, which I see you
have commented out. You should add it to all the other places where
you assign foreground colours, though.

Go here: http://www.htmlhelp.com/cgi-bin/csscheck.cgi
and enter your CSS file. This validator does plainly remark if you
have a missing background.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
Nico Schuyt

2005-03-30, 12:09 am

Dano wrote:
> "Nico Schuyt" schreef
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> Hmm.. this is more difficult, because it's an outside link. Any
> suggestions how to create an own simple guestbook are very welcome!


I built a very simple one myself some time ago. Try the
http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/test/gastenboek.php
It's just one file, only a few lines of (php)code and easy to integrate. I
could send you the source if you like it.

--
Nico
http://www.nicoschuyt.nl




kchayka

2005-03-30, 12:09 am

Dano wrote:
>
> But why is my site showing OK in IE and bad in Opera and Mozilla. Especially
> positioning of the
> navigation and the content. Please look only on:
> http://www.ltvborgharen.nl/home.shtml


You have not set any explicit widths for either the navbar or the
content area, so you are leaving it up to the browser how to render it.
Results can be unpredictable, as you noticed. Suggestion:

Float the navbar left and set width:10em or whatever looks good to you.
Don't float the content, just set margin-left:11em.

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

2005-03-30, 7:44 am


"Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> schreef in bericht
news:zUl2e.2039$kC3.1122@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> Dano wrote:
>
> Naturally, you do not add "transparent" to anyplace where you DO want a
> background colour to show, such as the body { }, which I see you have
> commented out. You should add it to all the other places where you assign
> foreground colours, though.
>
> Go here: http://www.htmlhelp.com/cgi-bin/csscheck.cgi
> and enter your CSS file. This validator does plainly remark if you have a
> missing background.


Nice site! I've changed the backfround-color property to background and
added the color property

thanks
>
> --
> -bts
> -This space intentionally left blank.



Dano

2005-03-30, 7:44 am


"kchayka" <usenet@c-net.us> schreef in bericht
news:3au9noF6djfftU1@individual.net...
> Dano wrote:
>
> You have not set any explicit widths for either the navbar or the
> content area, so you are leaving it up to the browser how to render it.
> Results can be unpredictable, as you noticed. Suggestion:
>
> Float the navbar left and set width:10em or whatever looks good to you.
> Don't float the content, just set margin-left:11em.


I've tried setting the width in the nav and content section, but it still
doesn't render nice. And this way: if the font-size is increased by the
user, the nav-section doesn't expand anymore. So still open for suggestions
;-)
Is there a crucial difference between px and em?

Dan


kchayka

2005-03-30, 7:44 am

Dano wrote:
>
> Is there a crucial difference between px and em?


There is a huge difference. If you spent a few minutes searching the
google archives I bet you'd find all kinds of info on the subject,
including the reference in the W3C specs.

<URL:http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search>
<URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata....alue-def-length>

Be advised, however, that browsers have not implemented 'px' the way the
specs state. In reality, 'px' are not relative units at all. But if you
did some research in google groups, you would have found this out
yourself. ;)

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

2005-03-30, 7:44 am

Dano wrote:

> I've recently changed the complete site I had from those
> horrible frames to a CSS-website.
>
> link: http://www.ltvborgharen.nl
>
> The site is about a (small) dutch tennisclub for which I
> maintain this site free of charge. Please give me your
> views and comments on this site regarding readability
> (even if you don't speak dutch :-), visibility,
> clickability, etc etc
>
> I've checked the site for the HTML 4.01 transitional and
> the CSS-check as well.
>
> All comments are welcome
>
> --
> Dan


I'd get rid of the splash page. If the club members
*insist* on a big logo, put it beneath those left hand
links.

Use lists of links (since they are, in fact, lists),
styled in CSS with something like:
ul{
background: transparent;
color: #000;
border: 0px;
text-align:left;
list-style-type:disc;
list-style-position:outside;
list-style-image:url(img/kleinebal_open.gif) !important;}
li {
color:#000;
background: transparent;
list-style-position:outside;
margin-bottom: 5px;
width:60%;}
____________
then in markup
_____________
<ul>
<li><a....></a></li>
........
</ul>
__________
Note that the <ul> does not have to be contained in a
<div>. It is a block level item that can stand on
its own. The page, as it stands, suffers from both
div-itis and table-itis.

Anytime you use <br />, think hard. Is this something
that could be done in the style sheet? Am I using the
wrong kind of tag to mark up the item?
--
mbstevens http://www.mbstevens.com

Stephen Poley

2005-03-30, 7:07 pm

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 23:36:05 -0600, kchayka <usenet@c-net.us> wrote:

>Dano wrote:
>
>There is a huge difference. If you spent a few minutes searching the
>google archives I bet you'd find all kinds of info on the subject,
>including the reference in the W3C specs.
>
><URL:http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search>
><URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata....alue-def-length>
>
>Be advised, however, that browsers have not implemented 'px' the way the
>specs state. In reality, 'px' are not relative units at all.


Well ... this is an area that is frequently misunderstood. Partly
because the spec isn't terribly clear. With the essential qualifications
"relative to the viewing device" and "if the pixel density of the output
device is very different from that of a typical computer display" they
*are* actually implemented (roughly) according to spec in at least one
area: i.e. for printers. If pixels were implemented as physical printer
pixels, one would end up with some awfully small printed text.

But this usage of the term "relative unit" in the spec is confusing.

--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/
Barbara de Zoete

2005-03-30, 7:08 pm

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:36:01 +0200, Dano <danielXYZrijs@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I've recently changed the complete site I had from those horrible frames to
> a CSS-website.
>
> link: http://www.ltvborgharen.nl
>


WRAAHH! What's with that splash page? Why? There is hardly anybody who likes
needing to click again after they thought they might have found something
useful. Also, you have no control over where a visitor enters the page. People
comming to you through search engines will hardly ever start at the top of your
domain. They'll start at one of the content pages.

I don't understand the dim and somewhat dull colors. I always would think brick
red and Wimbledon green would do good with a tennis site. What's with the grays?

I think your font size is set too small.

It's a good thing you moved away from frames, but it's a pitty you moved towards
another flawed design method, being abusing tables for layout: go for a
tableless design
<http://groups.google.com/groups?as_...w.authoring.%2A>
and <http://www.google.com/search?q=%20tableless+design%20>.

Why on earth do you fix the width of the design? There is nothing (like a
copmlex graphic that is _content_) in your pages that makes that desirable.
Think of how many different viewport sizes are possible (over 800.000). You
cater for only a few: read on liquid or fluid design
<http://groups.google.com/groups?as_...w.authoring.%2A>
and <http://www.google.com/search?q=liquid+OR+fluid+design>.

Why are menu items that show the page you're on, still alive?

Why is the title (some simple text with a logo next to it) all image?

Images that are not relevant as content (such as special bullets) are better
left without a value for the [alt] attribute, since (if someone has no images
available) it is odd to have tennisbal home tennisbal over ltv tennisbal
competitie on your screen.

> I've checked the site for the HTML 4.01 transitional and the CSS-check as
> well.
>


On the W3C valid logo:
Firstly, not all pages that carry that 'badge of honour' are valid actually
<http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=h...comodatie.shtml>.
Secondly, since it is the one bit that has color, it stands out. But it is
also the bit which has no relevance for a visitor what so ever. There is no
message you convay. To speak our mothers tongue: het zal ze werkelijk worst zijn
of een pagina valideert of niet.

There are a few irregularities you do on every page, like the error in syntax
when inserting an empty element (<img/> <br/> ). The slash is not supposed to be
there with html 4.01 transitional.
I don't understand why you use transitional. Since it is a new design, you
should have tried strict. The transition period ended somewhere mid to late
nineties.

Over all, I'd say it's a proper attempt. But a somewhat dull and mediocre result.

> --
> Dan
>


Your sig(nature) separator is broken.

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
Edwin van der Vaart

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm

Nico Schuyt wrote:
> Dano wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> I built a very simple one myself some time ago. Try the
> http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/test/gastenboek.php
> It's just one file, only a few lines of (php)code and easy to integrate. I
> could send you the source if you like it.

Could you send me the source of the gastbook, because I'm interested in
a simple gastbook.
--
Edwin van der Vaart
http://www.semi-conductor.nl/ Links to Semiconductors sites
http://www.evandervaart.nl/ Under construction
Dano

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm

I'm working on the redesign after your comments (fluid etc).
But why is my site showing OK in IE and bad in Opera and Mozilla. Especially
positioning of the
navigation and the content. Please look only on:
http://www.ltvborgharen.nl/home.shtml as I'm still remaking the rest (some
work, some don't)

regards
Dan


Dano

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm


"Barbara de Zoete" <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:opsocrzjztx5vgts@zoete_b...
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 16:36:01 +0200, Dano <danielXYZrijs@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> WRAAHH! What's with that splash page? Why? There is hardly anybody who
> likes needing to click again after they thought they might have found
> something useful. Also, you have no control over where a visitor enters
> the page. People comming to you through search engines will hardly ever
> start at the top of your domain. They'll start at one of the content
> pages.


I will change that. There's no specific reason for the splash page, other
than having the counter on it.

> I don't understand the dim and somewhat dull colors. I always would think
> brick red and Wimbledon green would do good with a tennis site. What's
> with the grays?


Working on that (more clay now ;-))

> I think your font size is set too small.


In layout.css the font-size is set to 100%. Isn't this the way the have it?
All fonts are adjustable on the site.

> It's a good thing you moved away from frames, but it's a pitty you moved
> towards another flawed design method, being abusing tables for layout: go
> for a tableless design
> <http://groups.google.com/groups?as_...w.authoring.%2A>
> and <http://www.google.com/search?q=%20tableless+design%20>.


Working on the tables, but it takes some more work and reading.

When is it OK to have a table? Reading about it shows that tables are used
for tabular data (duh). Is the kalender I use tabular data
(http://www.ltvborgharen.nl/kalender2005.shtml)?

> Why on earth do you fix the width of the design? There is nothing (like a
> copmlex graphic that is _content_) in your pages that makes that
> desirable. Think of how many different viewport sizes are possible (over
> 800.000). You cater for only a few: read on liquid or fluid design
> <http://groups.google.com/groups?as_...w.authoring.%2A>
> and <http://www.google.com/search?q=liquid+OR+fluid+design>.


Partially fixed to fluids, but doesn't work ok in FF and Opera (only in IE).
Any suggestions what I'm doing wrong?

> Why are menu items that show the page you're on, still alive?


What do you mean? If you've click on e.g. "Accomodatie", that you can click
on it again? If that's your question, then this is meant to be, because the
underlying pages in "Accomodatie" all have the same nav_accomodatie.html
subpage. This way people can click back to the "main accomodatie" page.

>
> Why is the title (some simple text with a logo next to it) all image?


Wanted to change that, but couldn't manage (yet) to have the text correctly
vertically aligned (middle).

> Images that are not relevant as content (such as special bullets) are
> better left without a value for the [alt] attribute, since (if someone
> has no images available) it is odd to have tennisbal home tennisbal over
> ltv tennisbal competitie on your screen.


fixed

>
> On the W3C valid logo:
> Firstly, not all pages that carry that 'badge of honour' are valid
> actually
> <http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=h...comodatie.shtml>.


I'll scroll to the pages once more for these smaller issues

> Secondly, since it is the one bit that has color, it stands out. But it
> is also the bit which has no relevance for a visitor what so ever. There
> is no message you convay. To speak our mothers tongue: het zal ze
> werkelijk worst zijn of een pagina valideert of niet.


Dat is ook very true. I just leave it temporarily until my pages are
complete (and checked). After that I'll remove it.

>
> There are a few irregularities you do on every page, like the error in
> syntax when inserting an empty element (<img/> <br/> ). The slash is not
> supposed to be there with html 4.01 transitional.
> I don't understand why you use transitional. Since it is a new design,
> you should have tried strict. The transition period ended somewhere mid
> to late nineties.


Switched to strict

>
> Over all, I'd say it's a proper attempt. But a somewhat dull and mediocre
> result.


Well....í'm just a simple amateur trying to do a bit for the local sportclub
in a small village. I guess not one visitor of the club will have any clue
what happens on the pages ("behind the scenes"). It's more for my own
learning to have a "proper" page set up.

just working along....

regards
Dan


Dano

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm


"Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> schreef in bericht
news:bYk2e.125319$H05.90591@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> Dano wrote:
>
>
> ..but in presentation.css, you have:
>
> body { font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;
> color: black;
> font-size: 90%;
> }
>
> ..and I don't see sizes in layout.css.


Oops, my mistake. It's indeed only of course in presenation.css. I've
changed it to 100%

> Couple other tips: in the css are numerous colour settings, such as
> p.green { color: green; }
> p.blue { color: blue; }
>
> What will you do if next month the client wants you to change green parts
> to .. blue, and the blue parts to green?
>
> p.green { color: blue; }
> p.blue { color: green; } ?
>
> Recommend using class names that indicate the feeling, rather than the
> result:
>
> p.soft { color: green; }
> p.cool { color: blue; }
> p.sharp { color: silver; }
> p.hot { color: red; } etc.


It's more of a css-way to have different colors in the site. Is there a
neath way to do this within the html of the site itself?

> You should also add a background: transparent to any place you set a
> foreground colour.


Done

> --
> -bts
> -This space intentionally left blank.


thanks for the comments

Dan


Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm

Dano wrote:
> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> schreef in
> bericht news:bYk2e.125319$H05.90591@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
> Oops, my mistake. It's indeed only of course in presenation.css.
> I've changed it to 100%


Ok...

>
> It's more of a css-way to have different colors in the site. Is
> there a neath way to do this within the html of the site itself?


The point is you don't want the HTML to read:
<p class="green">Text here...</p>
and display blue text. Calling the class "green" is essentially the
same as putting the presentation in the HTML.

Similar to: p.bold ( font-style: italic; }
and <p class="bold">This is italic text</p>

>
> Done


...except you need to spell it correctly, else it will be ignored. <g>
[ "transparant;" ] and it should also be added to all the other colour
settings as well.

> thanks for the comments


Welcome.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm

Dano wrote:

> "Barbara de Zoete" <b_de_zoete@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
> news:opsocrzjztx5vgts@zoete_b...
>
>
> In layout.css the font-size is set to 100%. Isn't this the way the
> have it? All fonts are adjustable on the site.


...but in presentation.css, you have:

body { font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;
color: black;
font-size: 90%;
}

...and I don't see sizes in layout.css.

Couple other tips: in the css are numerous colour settings, such as
p.green { color: green; }
p.blue { color: blue; }

What will you do if next month the client wants you to change green
parts to .. blue, and the blue parts to green?

p.green { color: blue; }
p.blue { color: green; } ?

Recommend using class names that indicate the feeling, rather than the
result:

p.soft { color: green; }
p.cool { color: blue; }
p.sharp { color: silver; }
p.hot { color: red; } etc.

You should also add a background: transparent to any place you set a
foreground colour.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
Dano

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm


"Nico Schuyt" <nschuyt@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:4249e34d$0$86535$dbd49001@news.euronet.nl...
> Dano wrote:
>
> If, like you say, you are a simple amateur, it's very well built.
> Clean, easy to read and to navigate. Compliments!


Thanks, I'm learning every time ;-) My next step is design without tables...

> Some remarks:
> - Don't scale pictures in HTML (Like the
> http://www.ltvborgharen.nl/pics/game1.JPG) The result is ugly. Use a
> picture
> editor instead.


Will do

> - There's a problem with the sponsors page (IE:
> http://www.nicoschuyt.nl/test/ltv.png ) and the sitemap


You're right. I was just at that time fixing those pages. Now they should be
fine.

> - The presentation.css has an error ('backgroud')


fixed

> - Try to give the guestbook the same layout as the rest of the site.


Hmm.. this is more difficult, because it's an outside link. Any suggestions
how to create an own simple guestbook are very welcome!

>
> Good luck!


thanks
Dan


Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm

Dano wrote:
> it's getting late ;-)
>
> If I add the transparent to the css, my clay background is gone.
> How do I correct this?


Naturally, you do not add "transparent" to anyplace where you DO want
a background colour to show, such as the body { }, which I see you
have commented out. You should add it to all the other places where
you assign foreground colours, though.

Go here: http://www.htmlhelp.com/cgi-bin/csscheck.cgi
and enter your CSS file. This validator does plainly remark if you
have a missing background.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
kchayka

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm

Dano wrote:
>
> But why is my site showing OK in IE and bad in Opera and Mozilla. Especially
> positioning of the
> navigation and the content. Please look only on:
> http://www.ltvborgharen.nl/home.shtml


You have not set any explicit widths for either the navbar or the
content area, so you are leaving it up to the browser how to render it.
Results can be unpredictable, as you noticed. Suggestion:

Float the navbar left and set width:10em or whatever looks good to you.
Don't float the content, just set margin-left:11em.

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

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm


"Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> schreef in bericht
news:zUl2e.2039$kC3.1122@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> Dano wrote:
>
> Naturally, you do not add "transparent" to anyplace where you DO want a
> background colour to show, such as the body { }, which I see you have
> commented out. You should add it to all the other places where you assign
> foreground colours, though.
>
> Go here: http://www.htmlhelp.com/cgi-bin/csscheck.cgi
> and enter your CSS file. This validator does plainly remark if you have a
> missing background.


Nice site! I've changed the backfround-color property to background and
added the color property

thanks
>
> --
> -bts
> -This space intentionally left blank.



kchayka

2005-04-04, 12:07 pm

Dano wrote:
>
> Is there a crucial difference between px and em?


There is a huge difference. If you spent a few minutes searching the
google archives I bet you'd find all kinds of info on the subject,
including the reference in the W3C specs.

<URL:http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search>
<URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata....alue-def-length>

Be advised, however, that browsers have not implemented 'px' the way the
specs state. In reality, 'px' are not relative units at all. But if you
did some research in google groups, you would have found this out
yourself. ;)

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

2005-04-06, 11:25 pm

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 23:36:05 -0600, kchayka <usenet@c-net.us> wrote:

>Dano wrote:
>
>There is a huge difference. If you spent a few minutes searching the
>google archives I bet you'd find all kinds of info on the subject,
>including the reference in the W3C specs.
>
><URL:http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search>
><URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata....alue-def-length>
>
>Be advised, however, that browsers have not implemented 'px' the way the
>specs state. In reality, 'px' are not relative units at all.


Well ... this is an area that is frequently misunderstood. Partly
because the spec isn't terribly clear. With the essential qualifications
"relative to the viewing device" and "if the pixel density of the output
device is very different from that of a typical computer display" they
*are* actually implemented (roughly) according to spec in at least one
area: i.e. for printers. If pixels were implemented as physical printer
pixels, one would end up with some awfully small printed text.

But this usage of the term "relative unit" in the spec is confusing.

--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/
Sponsored Links


Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com  Software forum  Computer Hardware reviews