Hello all,

Some weeks ago I asked your feedback on the CSS redesign of my -
currently table-based - website. Since then I have incorporated most of
your comments, so it's now time for the next validation. I have tested
the site in IE 5.5 (not IE6!), Opera 7.22 (including text-browser
emulation), Mozilla Firebird 0.7+ and the W3C validators.

Before pursuing the conversion of the entire website, I like to ask your
opinion once again. Thanks in advance for your feedback!

Regards,
Marc Rauw.


Links (server may be slow!):

New site (template only, links don't work):
http://home.hccnet.nl/m.rauw/dutchr...w/template3.htm
http://home.hccnet.nl/m.rauw/dutchr...w/template3.css

Previous version (template only, links don't work):
http://home.hccnet.nl/m.rauw/dutchr...w/template1.htm
http://home.hccnet.nl/m.rauw/dutchr...w/template1.css

Original table-based lay-out:
http://home.hccnet.nl/m.rauw/dutchroll/old/index.html
http://home.hccnet.nl/m.rauw/dutchr...d/dutchroll.css


Changes since last time:

- Almost all sizes are now specified in 'em', although the initial basic
width is still determined by the 640px width of the title graphic.

- The site no longer has a fixed width in standards-compliant browsers;
it can be resized within a limited boundary of 640px to 92% of the
browser window (Opera zooms the page i.s.o. resizing the fonts and
block-elements, IE 5.5 still uses a fixed width of 640px). The max-size
delays the appearance of a horizontal scroll-bar for large font-sizes;
it doesn't actually stop it as the padding will eventually overflow the
browser window.

- I have tried to improve navigation by replacing the definition list by
an unordered list, including the title graphic as an H1 element,
emphasizing the active page in the navigation menu, including a 'skip
navigation option' for textbrowsers, and including two small floating
'to top' and 'home' buttons (IE 5.5 positions these buttons in the
footer instead of floating them).

- I have ditched Verdana in order to get nice looking fonts at 100%
fontsize.

<rauw@!RemoveThisPlease!.worldonline.nl> wrote:
quote:

>
>Before pursuing the conversion of the entire website, I like to ask your
>  opinion once again. Thanks in advance for your feedback!
>
>Links (server may be slow!):
>
>New site (template only, links don't work):
>   http://home.hccnet.nl/m.rauw/dutchr...w/template3.htm


You're wasting approx. 30 % of my screenwidth :-(


John OO
--
<http://webcel.nl/>

"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once"
- John Archibald Wheeler -

Marc Rauw wrote:
quote:

> Links (server may be slow!):


Rather an understatement ;-)
quote:

>    http://home.hccnet.nl/m.rauw/dutchr...w/template3.htm
>    http://home.hccnet.nl/m.rauw/dutchr...w/template3.css


I have tested in a few browsers for you.

Works great in IE6, Opera 5.12 and 6.06, Konqueror 3 and Mozilla 1.0.2.
Degrades nicely in Netscape 4.8, Dillo 0.7.3 and Lynx 2.8.5dev12.

Generally well-written code, good heading structure, etc.

Only real complaint is that the huge banner can cause problems on low
resolutions (e.g. Konqueror at 800x600 with a sidebar causes the banner to
stick out into the aether right of the screen!)

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?id=132

Toby A Inkster wrote:
quote:

> Only real complaint is that the huge banner can cause problems on low
> resolutions (e.g. Konqueror at 800x600 with a sidebar causes the banner to
> stick out into the aether right of the screen!)


I know. I plan to replace the banner by a more flexible combination of a
small logo and a styled text header some day. That will also eliminate
the reason for choosing the default width of 640px, which currently
causes 30% of John W's screenwidth to be wasted. ;) However, to do so I
need to create some good artwork first. For the time being I'm primarily
concentrating on things like accessibility, downgradability and validity
of the code, to mention a few important idities.

Thanks for testing this in the other browsers!

Regards,
Marc Rauw

Toby A Inkster wrote:
quote:

> Only real complaint is that the huge banner can cause problems on low
> resolutions (e.g. Konqueror at 800x600 with a sidebar causes the banner to
> stick out into the aether right of the screen!)


I know. I plan to replace the banner by a more flexible combination of a
small logo and a styled text header some day. That will also eliminate
the reason for choosing the default width of 640px, which currently
causes 30% of John W's screenwidth to be wasted. ;) However, to do so I
need to create some good artwork first. For the time being I'm primarily
concentrating on things like accessibility, downgradability and validity
of the code, to mention a few important idities.

Thanks for testing this in the other browsers!

Regards,
Marc Rauw