request for abuse (critique a site)

Discussion in 'HTML' started by rossz, Sep 25, 2005.

  1. rossz

    rossz Guest

    I have two versions of a website, I'm trying to decide which one is
    preferred.

    This is the current "active" version.

    http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.php

    And this one has a fancy new menu system:

    http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.test.php

    Unless I missed testing a page, both versions are 100% xml 1.0 strict
    complient, not even warnings.

    I'd welcome criticism of the general layout, the choice of colors, and
    which of the two you think is the better.

    Important note, I'm color blind (color deficiency syndrome), so if you
    recommend color changes, please give me the code (e.g. #123456), don't
    say "oh, an off-beige would look better" as I won't have a f*ing clue
    what that looks like.

    FYI, the popout menus are done in pure css. I learned how to do this
    trick from http://www.seoconsultants.com/css/menus/vertical/.

    --
    Rossz
    God kills a kitten each time someone uses Internet Explorer
     
    rossz, Sep 25, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. rossz

    dorayme Guest

    > From: rossz <>
    >
    > I have two versions of a website, I'm trying to decide which one is
    > preferred.
    >
    > This is the current "active" version.
    >
    > http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.php
    >
    > And this one has a fancy new menu system:
    >
    > http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.test.php
    >
    > Unless I missed testing a page, both versions are 100% xml 1.0 strict
    > complient, not even warnings.
    >
    > I'd welcome criticism of the general layout, the choice of colors, and
    > which of the two you think is the better.
    >



    The new one looks nice. I did not look at the code.

    I would leave out the W3C logos (few will find them useful or
    interesting).

    Personally I would leave out the + signs, one does not need to
    know that there is further nesting: argument being that if one
    is not interested in the link, it is not likely that one will be
    interested in the details. If one is, one is likely at the very
    least to run the mouse over it and it will be obvious. Good that
    you let the top link *itself* link directly to the object of the
    first link on the list in the subset. (2 reasons, one that the
    dropdown might not work for all (yes, I know about your Notes
    but that's me, I'm nosey), two that an impatient user might not
    want to wait and fiddle with getting the mouse just so... trust
    me on this or ask further).

    But bad that when you do go to the subset links, you can't
    further navigate without having to use your fancy dropdown. Put
    all the important people, for example in a simple strip text
    horiz list at the top right up to Medina Sidonia (what a
    fabulous name).

    Minor thing, maybe don't bother, be nice to have a bit more side
    padding between text and inline pics.

    I was going to stop here but I just took a look at hats, shirts
    and so on... more reason to go white bg and save the trouble of
    doing what really ought to be done and that is prepare the gifs
    as transparencies. Forget about colour altogether I would say on
    this site.

    You can't go too wrong with black and white mainly...
    Personally, I would just go white for the text on black and
    achieve a gain in simplicity and elegance. More with less.

    But really, it looks nice and well done - terrific stuff, the
    subject matter!

    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 25, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. rossz

    rossz Guest

    dorayme wrote:

    > Personally I would leave out the + signs, one does not need to
    > know that there is further nesting: argument being that if one
    > is not interested in the link, it is not likely that one will be
    > interested in the details. If one is, one is likely at the very
    > least to run the mouse over it and it will be obvious.


    I've been thinking about dropping the + signs, but I kind of think they
    look cool. Perhaps some "pirate" related graphic would be a better
    choice. If more people agree with you, I'll drop them. I'm not that
    attached to the cool factor. :)

    > Good that
    > you let the top link *itself* link directly to the object of the
    > first link on the list in the subset. (2 reasons, one that the
    > dropdown might not work for all (yes, I know about your Notes
    > but that's me, I'm nosey), two that an impatient user might not
    > want to wait and fiddle with getting the mouse just so... trust
    > me on this or ask further).


    I was concerned about mouse accuracy in using the menus. That's one of
    the reasons I am hesitant to switch the default version over to the
    fancy menus.

    The menus probably won't work with IE before 5.x or an old Netscape
    browser. Does anyone still use something that old? A full contents
    page is available that lists all the links, so there is always a way to
    get to things if using a broken browser.

    I just downloaded Opera so I can see how things look in it.

    > But bad that when you do go to the subset links, you can't
    > further navigate without having to use your fancy dropdown. Put
    > all the important people, for example in a simple strip text
    > horiz list at the top right up to Medina Sidonia (what a
    > fabulous name).


    That would really screw up the ascetics, I think. I'll have to think
    this over.

    > Minor thing, maybe don't bother, be nice to have a bit more side
    > padding between text and inline pics.


    I just changed that from 0.5em to 1em.

    > I was going to stop here but I just took a look at hats, shirts
    > and so on... more reason to go white bg and save the trouble of
    > doing what really ought to be done and that is prepare the gifs
    > as transparencies. Forget about colour altogether I would say on
    > this site.


    I suppose I should finally get around to setting the transparency of
    those images. I'd rather not go to a white background. That just seems
    a bit too barren for my taste.


    > But really, it looks nice and well done - terrific stuff, the
    > subject matter!


    Thanks.

    --
    Rossz
    God kills a kitten each time someone uses Internet Explorer
     
    rossz, Sep 25, 2005
    #3
  4. rossz wrote:

    > That would really screw up the ascetics, I think. I'll have to think
    > this over.


    A significant number of your users are ascetics? ;)

    ascetic: "In the early church, one who devoted himself to a solitary and
    contemplative life, characterized by devotion, extreme self-denial, and
    self-mortification; a hermit; a recluse; hence, one who practices
    extreme rigor and self-denial in religious things."


    --
    Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
    Killing All Posts from GG: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Sep 25, 2005
    #4
  5. dorayme wrote:

    >> From: rossz <>
    >> http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.test.php


    > Minor thing, maybe don't bother, be nice to have a bit more side
    > padding between text and inline pics.


    ...and it's justified text, rather than normal ragged-right. Harder to
    read.

    #content{
    font-size: 11pt;
    }

    Points are for print. You already have font-size: 100% in the body; just
    leave it at that. And drop the Verdana.
    http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html

    --
    -bts
    -When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Sep 25, 2005
    #5
  6. rossz

    rossz Guest

    Blinky the Shark wrote:
    > rossz wrote:
    >
    >
    >>That would really screw up the ascetics, I think. I'll have to think
    >>this over.

    >
    >
    > A significant number of your users are ascetics? ;)
    >
    > ascetic: "In the early church, one who devoted himself to a solitary and
    > contemplative life, characterized by devotion, extreme self-denial, and
    > self-mortification; a hermit; a recluse; hence, one who practices
    > extreme rigor and self-denial in religious things."


    Curse me for not running a spell checker. I meant "aesthetics".

    --
    Rossz
    God kills a kitten each time someone uses Internet Explorer
     
    rossz, Sep 25, 2005
    #6
  7. rossz

    dorayme Guest

    > From: rossz <>
    >
    > dorayme wrote:
    >
    >> Personally I would leave out the + signs, one does not need to
    >> know that there is further nesting: argument being that if one
    >> is not interested in the link, it is not likely that one will be
    >> interested in the details. If one is, one is likely at the very
    >> least to run the mouse over it and it will be obvious.

    >
    > I've been thinking about dropping the + signs, but I kind of think they
    > look cool. Perhaps some "pirate" related graphic would be a better
    > choice. If more people agree with you, I'll drop them. I'm not that
    > attached to the cool factor. :)
    >


    Your instinct is important. Anyway, just "looking cool" to some
    or even a lot of people is not a sound *argument*.

    >> Good that
    >> you let the top link *itself* link directly to the object of the
    >> first link on the list in the subset. (2 reasons, one that the
    >> dropdown might not work for all (yes, I know about your Notes
    >> but that's me, I'm nosey), two that an impatient user might not
    >> want to wait and fiddle with getting the mouse just so... trust
    >> me on this or ask further).

    >
    > I was concerned about mouse accuracy in using the menus. That's one of
    > the reasons I am hesitant to switch the default version over to the
    > fancy menus.


    Work ok if one goes carefully horizontally

    >
    > The menus probably won't work with IE before 5.x or an old Netscape
    > browser. Does anyone still use something that old? A full contents
    > page is available that lists all the links, so there is always a way to
    > get to things if using a broken browser.
    >


    No, submenus don't work on my IE 5.1.6 on a Mac (unlike on
    Mozilla 1.3 or iCab... btw iCab reports it does not handle font
    adjust) but otherwise looks good. If you had a simple submenu at
    *the bottom* of the pages like Alvaro de Bazan, it would be very
    helpful and imo would not spoil the aesthetics (as long as you
    do not deliberately make it a big fancy affair - what do people
    not like about simple text links, they are nice and twinkle with
    colour on hover and stuff). Yes I know one *can* go to
    Contents...

    Remember, ex pirates (like me) are impatient, have old browsers
    they like bringing out and a fondness in general for old stuff
    but are still bloodthirsty and demanding. (Anyone interested in
    one of my pirate jokes?)


    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 25, 2005
    #7
  8. rossz wrote:
    > Blinky the Shark wrote:
    >> rossz wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>That would really screw up the ascetics, I think. I'll have to think
    >>>this over.

    >>
    >>
    >> A significant number of your users are ascetics? ;)
    >>
    >> ascetic: "In the early church, one who devoted himself to a solitary
    >> and contemplative life, characterized by devotion, extreme
    >> self-denial, and self-mortification; a hermit; a recluse; hence, one
    >> who practices extreme rigor and self-denial in religious things."

    >
    > Curse me for not running a spell checker. I meant "aesthetics".


    I know, and that wasn't a spelling flame. I was just riffing on the
    humorous idea that the misspelling created -- a site popular with
    ascetics. :) Language is fun. (And your spell checker shouldn't have
    caught it anyway, since it's a perfectly valid word, just the wrong
    one.)


    --
    Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
    Killing All Posts from GG: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Sep 25, 2005
    #8
  9. rossz

    dorayme Guest

    > From: Blinky the Shark <>
    >
    > rossz wrote:
    >
    >> That would really screw up the ascetics, I think. I'll have to think
    >> this over.

    >
    > A significant number of your users are ascetics? ;)
    >
    > ascetic: "In the early church, one who devoted himself to a solitary and
    > contemplative life, characterized by devotion, extreme self-denial, and
    > self-mortification; a hermit; a recluse; hence, one who practices
    > extreme rigor and self-denial in religious things."
    >


    Me, I have always practised "extreme rigor and self-denial in
    religious things".

    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 25, 2005
    #9
  10. rossz

    rf Guest

    rossz wrote:

    > http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.test.php


    Why have you reduced the font size to 75%, and even 60% of my normal
    default. I like my font at 16 points, you have set it to 11pt. I now have to
    lean on my mouse wheel to crank it back up to something I can read.

    And don't use pt or px, users of IE can not resize the text without using
    the accessibility options to ignore your font specifications entirely.

    Use % and use 100 of them. Better yet, don't specify any size at all.

    Cheers
    Richard.
     
    rf, Sep 25, 2005
    #10
  11. rossz

    rossz Guest

    Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

    > ..and it's justified text, rather than normal ragged-right. Harder to
    > read.


    I've looked at it set at 'justify' and 'left'. I still prefer it
    justified.

    > #content{
    > font-size: 11pt;
    > }
    >
    > Points are for print. You already have font-size: 100% in the body; just
    > leave it at that. And drop the Verdana.
    > http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html


    That verdana (as the first choice) slipped in when I grabbed the style
    sheet for doing the menus. Because it became first, it ended up making
    my text too big, so I added the font-size setting to fix that. Thanks
    for pointing out the problems with verdana. I've moved it in the list
    so it's the last choice before 'sans-serif' and could drop the font-size
    altogether since it was no longer required.

    --
    Rossz
    God kills a kitten each time someone uses Internet Explorer
     
    rossz, Sep 25, 2005
    #11
  12. rossz wrote:

    > Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
    >
    >> ..and it's justified text, rather than normal ragged-right. Harder to
    >> read.

    >
    > I've looked at it set at 'justify' and 'left'. I still prefer it
    > justified.


    The problem with justified text is the extra spacing between the words.
    As you read across the line, the eye encounters the extra wide gap and
    pauses a bit, thinking maybe its the end of a sentence.

    >> #content{
    >> font-size: 11pt;
    >> }
    >>
    >> Points are for print. You already have font-size: 100% in the body; just
    >> leave it at that. And drop the Verdana.
    >> http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html

    >
    > That verdana (as the first choice) slipped in when I grabbed the style
    > sheet for doing the menus. Because it became first, it ended up making
    > my text too big, so I added the font-size setting to fix that. Thanks
    > for pointing out the problems with verdana. I've moved it in the list
    > so it's the last choice before 'sans-serif' and could drop the font-size
    > altogether since it was no longer required.


    You still have this small size in the content paragraphs...

    #content p{font:normal 0.9em ...

    --
    -bts
    -When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Sep 25, 2005
    #12
  13. rossz

    rossz Guest

    rossz wrote:
    > I have two versions of a website, I'm trying to decide which one is
    > preferred.
    >
    > This is the current "active" version.
    >
    > http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.php
    >
    > And this one has a fancy new menu system:
    >
    > http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.test.php


    I've switched to the new style as the default.

    The new one:
    http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/

    The old one (for comparison):
    http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.old.php

    Thanks for all the feedback. I still have some tweaking to do, but it's
    damn close to completion.

    --
     
    rossz, Sep 25, 2005
    #13
  14. rossz

    Rincewind Guest

    On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 23:55:57 GMT, rossz wrote:

    > I have two versions of a website, I'm trying to decide which one is
    > preferred.
    >
    > This is the current "active" version.
    >
    > http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.php
    >
    > And this one has a fancy new menu system:
    >
    > http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.test.php
    >
    > Unless I missed testing a page, both versions are 100% xml 1.0 strict
    > complient, not even warnings.
    >
    > I'd welcome criticism of the general layout, the choice of colors, and
    > which of the two you think is the better.
    >
    > Important note, I'm color blind (color deficiency syndrome), so if you
    > recommend color changes, please give me the code (e.g. #123456), don't
    > say "oh, an off-beige would look better" as I won't have a f*ing clue
    > what that looks like.
    >
    > FYI, the popout menus are done in pure css. I learned how to do this
    > trick from http://www.seoconsultants.com/css/menus/vertical/.


    Don't like the plus signs on the menu's

    Don't like the pale blue background, off beige would look better ;-) (ok
    #FFE5B0 if you insist)

    Don't somehow think that London exported "led".

    I can't see any difference between the 2 links you've provided, am I
    missing something?

    I also agree with Beauregard T. Shagnasty about the justified text, it may
    look nice but it sure don't read nice.

    There is still some editing needed for instance the following <quote> I
    feel I have put together the nearly all the historical and technical
    information </quote> is grammatically incorrect.

    Can't leave without a bit of praise though, overall the site is good and
    I've bookmarked it to read more fully later.
     
    Rincewind, Sep 25, 2005
    #14
  15. rossz

    Toby Inkster Guest

    rossz wrote:

    > Important note, I'm color blind (color deficiency syndrome), so if you
    > recommend color changes, please give me the code (e.g. #123456), don't
    > say "oh, an off-beige would look better" as I won't have a f*ing clue
    > what that looks like.


    As it happens, an off-beige might look better. But because you asked me to
    abuse you, I'm not going to give you a hex code, you colour-blind turd!

    I think your site will be very useful for me, as I do plan to give up my
    life and become a pirate very soon. I suggest adding the following terms
    and phrases to your glossary:

    * Keel-haul
    * Shiver me timbers!
    * Yarrr!

    Do you know of a good source of pirate shirts in the UK?

    I find it interesting you don't mention Spain, Portugal and Holland (I
    avoid the use of the word "Netherlands" here deliberately) in your
    important places category. All were great sea-faring nations at the time.

    > Unless I missed testing a page, both versions are 100% xml 1.0 strict
    > complient, not even warnings.


    XHTML perhaps, as the XML 1.0 specification doesn't include "strict" and
    "loose" variants.

    It's pretty well put-togther code. One fault that I can find is in your
    somewhat odd use of heading elements. Your main heading is an <h3>,
    chapter headings <h1> and sub-chapters <h2>.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Now Playing ~ ./gerry_rafferty_-_baker_street.ogg
     
    Toby Inkster, Sep 25, 2005
    #15
  16. rossz

    Toby Inkster Guest

    rossz wrote:

    > I've been thinking about dropping the + signs, but I kind of think they
    > look cool. Perhaps some "pirate" related graphic would be a better
    > choice.


    Perhaps a sword extended in this direction: --->

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Now Playing ~ ./keane/hopes_and_fears/05_your_eyes_open.ogg
     
    Toby Inkster, Sep 25, 2005
    #16
  17. rossz

    Jake Guest

    In message <hIlZe.157$>, rossz
    <> writes
    >I have two versions of a website, I'm trying to decide which one is
    >preferred.
    >
    >This is the current "active" version.
    >
    > http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.php
    >
    >And this one has a fancy new menu system:
    >
    > http://vamos-wentworth.org/seadog/seadog.test.php
    >
    >Unless I missed testing a page, both versions are 100% xml 1.0 strict
    >complient, not even warnings.
    >
    >I'd welcome criticism of the general layout, the choice of colors, and
    >which of the two you think is the better.
    >
    >Important note, I'm color blind (color deficiency syndrome), so if you
    >recommend color changes, please give me the code (e.g. #123456), don't
    >say "oh, an off-beige would look better" as I won't have a f*ing clue
    >what that looks like.
    >
    >FYI, the popout menus are done in pure css. I learned how to do this
    >trick from http://www.seoconsultants.com/css/menus/vertical/.
    >


    Nice looking site; I shall have to come back and read through it more
    thoroughly when I get the time.

    Just one main (accessibility) comment:
    --------------------------------------------------
    Have you tried navigating the site using only the keyboard (as many
    people will need to do)?

    If the primary entry has subsidiary entries I could only get to the
    first subsidiary entry using IE6 and FireFox. I got to see them all in
    Opera, but then again, in Opera the menu becomes just one long list of
    links.

    You might have better luck -- but do try it ;-)

    Other odds-and-ends:
    ---------------------------
    (a) A text-to-speech engine will render '1 1/2' ('one-and-a-half') as
    'one one divided by two'.

    1&frac12; or 1 ½ would be better.

    (b) If I can't see the pages that I'm listening to, there seems to be no
    way to quickly locate the menu, as it's not the first entry in the
    html. I'd suggest putting an invisible link as the first entry on the
    pages -- even if you can't actually access all the menu entries ;-)

    Just a few thoughts.

    Regards.


    --
    Jake ( -- just a 'spam trap' mail address)
     
    Jake, Sep 25, 2005
    #17
  18. rossz

    Toby Inkster Guest

    Rincewind wrote:

    > Don't somehow think that London exported "led".


    Of course it does. London has a long history of manufacturing and
    exporting quality Light-Emitting Diodes throughout the world.

    http://www.electronelec.co.uk/
    Catalogue pp 43-45.

    We also do good smoke-emitting resistors and fire-emitting fuseboards.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Now Playing ~ ./ocean_colour_scene_-_the_riverboat_song.ogg
     
    Toby Inkster, Sep 25, 2005
    #18
  19. Toby Inkster wrote:

    > rossz wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I've been thinking about dropping the + signs, but I kind of think they
    >>look cool. Perhaps some "pirate" related graphic would be a better
    >>choice.

    >
    >
    > Perhaps a sword extended in this direction: --->
    >


    Or make the X's more Pirate 'Map-ish', you know follow the trail to 'X'
    marks the spot! ;-) Quick example, tried to fit your decor

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 25, 2005
    #19
  20. On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:22:09 +0200, Jonathan N. Little
    <> wrote:

    What's with the attachement? Please don't do that. If everybody needs to
    see something, upload it to a server and post a URL.


    --
    ,-- --<--@ -- 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 |
    `-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
     
    Barbara de Zoete, Sep 25, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Fao, Sean

    Critique Request: CheckBoxColumn

    Fao, Sean, Feb 15, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    516
    Fao, Sean
    Feb 15, 2006
  2. Cynthia Turcotte

    critique request

    Cynthia Turcotte, Sep 12, 2003, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    476
    Chris Leonard
    Sep 13, 2003
  3. Tom Wesley
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    825
    Tom Wesley
    Feb 27, 2005
  4. Mark Rae

    Request.Form abuse

    Mark Rae, Oct 21, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    23
    Views:
    881
    Kevin Spencer
    Oct 24, 2006
  5. Mark Rae

    Preventing Request.Form abuse

    Mark Rae, Oct 24, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    511
    Mark Rae
    Oct 27, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page