Website Test

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Borrox, Oct 20, 2005.

  1. Borrox

    Borrox Guest

    Hi
    Is there a specific NG where I can post to to have my site criticised for
    good or bad? if not and this is my best shot then here is my site
    www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm.
    Thanks for your time.
    Nig
     
    Borrox, Oct 20, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. [ X-posted: ahc; F'up: ahc ]

    On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:27:24 +0200, Borrox <> wrote:

    > Is there a specific NG where I can post to to have my site criticised for
    > good or bad?


    It's right next door at alt.html.critique.

    > www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm.


    Technically this thing is a nightmare. Besides the errors in markup
    <http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nigs1000.f2s.com%2Findex.htm>
    it has valid stuff onboard like <strong><img src="Images/top_trumps_ref.gif"
    width="443" height="165"></strong></font></p><p></p></div></td> which is a
    simple case of bad coding. The tables are no good for layout, the script for
    menus mean that visitors without javascript cannot use that specific menu (and
    one of them is Google, which will not be able to index what is behind a
    javascript menu).

    To top all that, the looks as I first arive, are bad too.
    <http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_test/ttr.png> Hint: You don't know the size
    of my viewport, you don't know if your visitor can see your images, you don't
    know what the default background color of the browser of your visitor is.

    Done hinting. Good luck,


    --
    ,-- --<--@ -- 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, Oct 20, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Borrox

    Borrox Guest

    "Barbara de Zoete" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:p.syxpbdmvx5vgts@zoete_b...
    >[ X-posted: ahc; F'up: ahc ]
    >
    > On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:27:24 +0200, Borrox <> wrote:
    >
    >> Is there a specific NG where I can post to to have my site criticised for
    >> good or bad?

    >
    > It's right next door at alt.html.critique.
    >
    >> www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm.

    >
    > Technically this thing is a nightmare. Besides the errors in markup
    > <http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nigs1000.f2s.com%2Findex.htm>
    > it has valid stuff onboard like <strong><img
    > src="Images/top_trumps_ref.gif" width="443"
    > height="165"></strong></font></p><p></p></div></td> which is a simple
    > case of bad coding. The tables are no good for layout, the script for
    > menus mean that visitors without javascript cannot use that specific menu
    > (and one of them is Google, which will not be able to index what is
    > behind a javascript menu).
    >
    > To top all that, the looks as I first arive, are bad too.
    > <http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_test/ttr.png> Hint: You don't know the
    > size of my viewport, you don't know if your visitor can see your images,
    > you don't know what the default background color of the browser of your
    > visitor is.
    >
    > Done hinting. Good luck,
    >


    Ouch!
    Thanks for that. I can only blame dreamweaver for the poor code. I will now
    go back and fix this.
    Do you have any advice about the tables, javascript and how to make it all
    work and viewable to most?
    The background is tiled a pale blue I don't understand how you see a bright
    sickly horrid purple, any ideas how I can get browsers like your to view
    correctly?
    Thanks for the criticism and well needed I think
    Nig
     
    Borrox, Oct 20, 2005
    #3
  4. Borrox

    Borrox Guest

    "Borrox" <> wrote in message
    news:dj7gqt$m4s$2surf.net...
    > Hi
    > Is there a specific NG where I can post to to have my site criticised for
    > good or bad? if not and this is my best shot then here is my site
    > www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm.
    > Thanks for your time.
    > Nig
    >

    I have just done a Validation and most of the 'errors' that I am left with I
    do not understand. I always thought that this < tag had be ended (closed)
    with this > tag. (Excuse me if I am not using the correct terminology but I
    am onlt a novice as is evident). Can someone please explaion to me why these
    are coming up as errors. The biggest proportion of what I have done are the
    Alt which I should have done anyway.
    Any help appreciated
    Nig
     
    Borrox, Oct 20, 2005
    #4
  5. Borrox

    Arne Guest

    Once upon a time *Borrox* wrote:

    > "Borrox" <> wrote in message
    > news:dj7gqt$m4s$2surf.net...
    >> Hi
    >> Is there a specific NG where I can post to to have my site criticised for
    >> good or bad? if not and this is my best shot then here is my site
    >> www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm.
    >> Thanks for your time.
    >> Nig
    >>

    > I have just done a Validation and most of the 'errors' that I am left with I
    > do not understand. I always thought that this < tag had be ended (closed)
    > with this > tag. (Excuse me if I am not using the correct terminology but I
    > am onlt a novice as is evident). Can someone please explaion to me why these
    > are coming up as errors. The biggest proportion of what I have done are the
    > Alt which I should have done anyway.
    > Any help appreciated


    The validator is not complaining about the "<" sign. Most time when
    "pointing" at that "spot", is where the error is detected because of
    something is missing in the tag or somewhere before that. If you read
    the expanation under the error, you will get a hint what's wrong.

    E.g. this:
    Line 268 column 7: end tag for element "DIV" which is not open.
    </div> (the ">" in read and underlinded)

    Explanation: The Validator found an end tag for the above element (the
    "element" is the whole div tag), but that element is not currently
    open. This is often caused by a leftover end tag from an element that
    was removed during editing, or by an implicitly closed element (if you
    have an error related to an element being used where it is not allowed.

    On line 61 you have a META tag for keywords within the body part of
    the page, that's not allowed. All META must be within the <head> and
    </head> part.

    BTW, what's the idea with using imagemaps to all images that is only
    one single link? Why isn't a simple <a href="....">image</a> good enough?

    --
    /Arne
    Now killing all top posters and posters who don't quote
    * How to post: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
    * From Google: http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/
    -------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Arne, Oct 20, 2005
    #5
  6. Borrox

    rf Guest

    Borrox wrote:

    > I have just done a Validation and most of the 'errors' that I am left with I
    > do not understand.


    Fix the obvious ones that you "sort of" understand. Many errors cause a
    cascade of further errors.

    For example you are missing a > on your <script tag. Put that in and quite
    a few subsequent errors will disappear.

    Others:

    Remove the cargo cult <!-- comments from within your script element.

    <script> elements *require* a type attribute. The language attribute is
    deprecated. Refer to the specification:
    http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/

    There is no attribute "height" for the table element. Pretty clear, it's
    not defined in the specifications.

    Ditto bordercolour.

    As to the form and p end tags missing, I havn't looked but you are probably
    nesting a form element inside a paragraph. This is not allowed. The <form>
    tag will close the existing <p> element. An implied </p> is inserted by the
    validator. Your </p> is an orphan, so in error.

    Last:
    Fire up settings>control panel>add/remove programs. Navigate to
    Dreamweaver. Choose "remove".

    Learn how to code using a vanilla text editor and a browser to test with.

    Once you can produce your page all by your self you will be experienced
    enough to reinstall DW and be savvy enough to not let it insert all the
    rubbish into your page that it *will* insert if you let it.

    --
    Cheers
    Richard.
     
    rf, Oct 20, 2005
    #6
  7. Borrox

    rf Guest

    Arne wrote:

    > BTW, what's the idea with using imagemaps to all images that is only
    > one single link?


    Dreamweaver.

    > Why isn't a simple <a href="....">image</a> good enough?


    Indeed

    --
    Cheers
    Richard.
     
    rf, Oct 20, 2005
    #7
  8. Borrox

    PeterMcC Guest

    Borrox wrote in
    <dj7gqt$m4s$2surf.net>

    > Hi
    > Is there a specific NG where I can post to to have my site criticised
    > for good or bad? if not and this is my best shot then here is my site
    > www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm.
    > Thanks for your time.


    Just a quick mention that your home page, in case you hadn't noticed, is now
    cached by Google so the site's on its way to being fully indexed.

    --
    PeterMcC
    If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
    inappropriate or offensive in any way,
    please ignore it and accept my apologies.
     
    PeterMcC, Oct 20, 2005
    #8
  9. Borrox

    Arne Guest

    Once upon a time *Borrox* wrote:

    > "Barbara de Zoete" <> wrote in message
    > news:eek:p.syxpbdmvx5vgts@zoete_b...
    >>[ X-posted: ahc; F'up: ahc ]
    >>
    >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:27:24 +0200, Borrox <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> Is there a specific NG where I can post to to have my site criticised for
    >>> good or bad?

    >>
    >> It's right next door at alt.html.critique.
    >>
    >>> www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm.

    >>
    >> Technically this thing is a nightmare. Besides the errors in markup
    >> <http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nigs1000.f2s.com%2Findex.htm>
    >> it has valid stuff onboard like <strong><img
    >> src="Images/top_trumps_ref.gif" width="443"
    >> height="165"></strong></font></p><p></p></div></td> which is a simple
    >> case of bad coding. The tables are no good for layout, the script for
    >> menus mean that visitors without javascript cannot use that specific menu
    >> (and one of them is Google, which will not be able to index what is
    >> behind a javascript menu).
    >>
    >> To top all that, the looks as I first arive, are bad too.
    >> <http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_test/ttr.png> Hint: You don't know the
    >> size of my viewport, you don't know if your visitor can see your images,
    >> you don't know what the default background color of the browser of your
    >> visitor is.
    >>
    >> Done hinting. Good luck,
    >>

    >
    > Ouch!
    > Thanks for that. I can only blame dreamweaver for the poor code. I will now
    > go back and fix this.


    Do you blame the car who hits you on the road, or the driver holding
    the steering wheel in it? :)

    --
    /Arne
    Now killing all top posters and posters who don't quote
    * How to post: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/brox.html
    * From Google: http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/
    -------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Arne, Oct 20, 2005
    #9
  10. Borrox wrote:
    > "Borrox" <> wrote in message
    > news:dj7gqt$m4s$2surf.net...
    >
    >>Hi
    >>Is there a specific NG where I can post to to have my site criticised for
    >>good or bad? if not and this is my best shot then here is my site
    >>www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm.
    >>Thanks for your time.
    >>Nig
    >>

    >
    > I have just done a Validation and most of the 'errors' that I am left with I
    > do not understand. I always thought that this < tag had be ended (closed)
    > with this > tag. (Excuse me if I am not using the correct terminology but I
    > am onlt a novice as is evident). Can someone please explaion to me why these
    > are coming up as errors. The biggest proportion of what I have done are the
    > Alt which I should have done anyway.
    > Any help appreciated
    > Nig
    >
    >

    I'll give you an example of an error that on the page that can cause
    warning down the page. In the head your script opening tag

    <script language="JavaScript" type="text/JavaScriptfunction
    mmLoadMenus() { ...

    Looks like a bad cut'n paste job, and I find no closing tag...

    My advice, dump the Dreamweaver for now, fire up Notepad and layout your
    page and learn html. Once you know how it works then use Dreamweaver to
    speed up the process if you wish, but you will know what you are doing
    and can fix the screw ups that WYSIWYG editors can introduce while
    developing a page.

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Oct 20, 2005
    #10
  11. Borrox

    Borrox Guest

    Cheers guys

    Well, it is what I wanted and I have got what I deserved, not that I am
    miffed with it. I knew that there would be something would be wrong.

    1. I will remove the hotspots.
    2. I will remove all javascript.
    3. I will play around with the site in Textpad and get my old HTML books
    out again.
    4. Peter McC, thanks for your help, it is much appreciated.

    For everyone that has helped. Thank you. No-one has caused offence as I did
    ask for what I got, help.

    Many thanks

    Nig
     
    Borrox, Oct 20, 2005
    #11
  12. Borrox

    Guest

    Re: Cheers guys

    Borrox wrote:
    > Well, it is what I wanted and I have got what I deserved, not that I am
    > miffed with it. I knew that there would be something would be wrong.
    >

    That's Ok......
    I had a look at your site before and it was not to bad.
    If you want a better WYSIWYG editor maybe try. http://www.nvu.com
    that's what I use and without to much re-coding my site validates
    without a problem.
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc
    > 1. I will remove the hotspots.
    > 2. I will remove all javascript.
    > 3. I will play around with the site in Textpad and get my old HTML books
    > out again.
    > 4. Peter McC, thanks for your help, it is much appreciated.
    >
    > For everyone that has helped. Thank you. No-one has caused offence as I did
    > ask for what I got, help.
    >
    > Many thanks
    >
    > Nig
     
    , Oct 20, 2005
    #12
  13. Borrox

    Borrox Guest

    Re: Cheers guys

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Borrox wrote:
    >> Well, it is what I wanted and I have got what I deserved, not that I am
    >> miffed with it. I knew that there would be something would be wrong.
    >>

    > That's Ok......
    > I had a look at your site before and it was not to bad.
    > If you want a better WYSIWYG editor maybe try. http://www.nvu.com
    > that's what I use and without to much re-coding my site validates
    > without a problem.
    > Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc


    Hi Chad
    The messing about altering the code etc is no big bother as I am not doing
    it to make money (fortunately) but it is all a learning curve. Seeing as I
    have had no tuition of any description I don't think I do too bad.

    I have put the Index page back on and fully validated as per recommendations
    from everyone.

    Nig
     
    Borrox, Oct 20, 2005
    #13
  14. "Borrox" <> said:
    > Thanks for that. I can only blame dreamweaver for the poor code.


    No YOU are responsible for the poor code. Dreamweaver only did what
    you told it to.

    > I will now go back and fix this.


    Damn right you will...


    --
    -=tn=-
     
    Travis Newbury, Oct 20, 2005
    #14
  15. "Borrox" <> said:
    > ...but I am onlt a novice as is
    > evident..


    Google the group for "good HTML tutorial" then take a look at a few
    of the turtotials (maybe take a few hous in the afternoon.) You will
    find Dreamweaver making much fewer mistakes. 0_o

    --
    -=tn=-
     
    Travis Newbury, Oct 20, 2005
    #15
  16. Borrox

    Neredbojias Guest

    Re: Cheers guys

    With neither quill nor qualm, Borrox quothed:

    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > Borrox wrote:
    > >> Well, it is what I wanted and I have got what I deserved, not that I am
    > >> miffed with it. I knew that there would be something would be wrong.
    > >>

    > > That's Ok......
    > > I had a look at your site before and it was not to bad.
    > > If you want a better WYSIWYG editor maybe try. http://www.nvu.com
    > > that's what I use and without to much re-coding my site validates
    > > without a problem.
    > > Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc

    >
    > Hi Chad
    > The messing about altering the code etc is no big bother as I am not doing
    > it to make money (fortunately) but it is all a learning curve. Seeing as I
    > have had no tuition of any description I don't think I do too bad.
    >
    > I have put the Index page back on and fully validated as per recommendations
    > from everyone.


    It takes time to learn html (etc.) well. Believe me, everybody starts
    out wrong. Everybody. Even if their markup is more-or-less correct, it
    is misused/misapplied/inefficient or otherwise turkeyish (-
    Thanksgiving's coming). We all look back on our early efforts and
    chuckle ironically.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
     
    Neredbojias, Oct 20, 2005
    #16
  17. Borrox

    Borrox Guest

    Properly Validated

    OK, so I have now validated the site.

    I would like if you have the time to give it another whirl to see what you
    about layout, colours etc etc

    www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm

    Many thanks for all your help.

    Nig
     
    Borrox, Oct 20, 2005
    #17
  18. On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Arne quoted:

    > Line 268 column 7: end tag for element "DIV" which is not open.

    [...]
    > Explanation: The Validator found an end tag for the above element


    and apparently tried to explain:

    > (the "element" is the whole div tag),


    Er, no: an "element", in a properly formed document, would be
    everything from the start tag (in this case <div>) to the end tag (in
    this case </div>), inclusive.

    In this case, however, the report is saying that the end tag doesn't
    match with with a corresponding start tag, so there isn't really a div
    "element" there, although the presence of the </div> seems to indicate
    that there ought to be.

    > This is often caused by a leftover end tag from an element that
    > was removed during editing, or by an implicitly closed element (if you
    > have an error related to an element being used where it is not allowed.


    Quite so. I was only picking up your IMHO misleading gloss on the
    term "element".

    http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.2.1

    On a lighter note, see "Not the SGML FAQ", Part 5, at:
    http://www.flightlab.com/~joe/sgml/faq-not.txt

    have fun
     
    Alan J. Flavell, Oct 20, 2005
    #18
  19. Re: Properly Validated

    Borrox wrote:

    > OK, so I have now validated the site.


    OK, but that doesn't fix any of the problems. :-(

    > I would like if you have the time to give it another whirl to see what
    > you about layout, colours etc etc
    >
    > www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm


    Go here:
    http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/
    and enter the link to:
    http://www.nigs1000.f2s.com/waddingtons_super_top_trumps_s2.htm

    1,279,259 bytes ???

    You need to break that up into a separate page for each category. Users
    going back to the main page, and clicking on another category get to
    download the whole 1.3 megabytes all over again. Those on dialup will be
    gone soon.

    The main page: you have small bold justified text, very hard to read.
    You have antiquated HTML markup. Look up CSS
    http://htmldog.com/

    The graphic "buttons" in the center of the page seem to duplicate the
    links just below them. Use one or the other.

    Validating with Traditional (~1995 markup) isn't anything to brag about,
    and your visitors won't care about the W3C logo, so remove it. Better
    you switch to 4.01 Strict and validate with that. Use the full doctype
    as well, see: http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/valid-dtd-list.html

    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">

    Pages with everything centered always say to me: Amateur.
    Sorry, but it's true.

    --
    -bts
    -When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Oct 20, 2005
    #19
  20. Borrox

    dorayme Guest

    > From: "Borrox" <>
    >
    > Hi
    > Is there a specific NG where I can post to to have my site criticised for
    > good or bad? if not and this is my best shot then here is my site
    > www.nigs1000.f2s.com/index.htm.
    > Thanks for your time.
    > Nig
    >



    Hi Nig, looked at your site. Just a few remarks, you may or may
    not find them helpful:

    The tag <FONT> is deprecated and should no longer be used. It is
    suggested CSS be used instead. (To use a well known phrase).

    The main text is a bit hard to read against the speckly blue
    background. Frankly I did not like the background (but I am a
    bit severe on these things, I prefer plain white mainly or
    simple colours, they look better to me mostly. But your black on
    this is almost certainly a mistake and especially since for no
    reason i can see chose a smaller than normal font. Why would
    anyone who has set their machines to read normal font want to
    read your main spiel at less than normal?)

    A little bit slow on loading on dialup but perhaps just
    acceptable (it would be somehow nice if you could get the top
    banner to load first rather than last as on my connection, I was
    dying to see it!)

    I know it is tempting but there is not much reason for tables
    for layout on your site.

    About layout, I do think the info is unnecessarily spread out.
    You might consider using the width of the area available better
    and make the whole thing more compact.

    Lose the W3C logo, anyone that knows what it is will not be
    impressed and those who don't won't have a clue anyway. Make a
    nice big print of it and have it on your own wall in front of
    your desk... :)

    I offer this before I look - with mixed feelings - at what other
    members of this shark club say. :)

    Boy or boy did I tremble for you when I saw your invitation...
    There is something wrong with me I think, I feel like a ring
    attendant at a Roman gladiator contest (where the lions are
    about to be let in...).

    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Oct 21, 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. Flip
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    446
    Karl Seguin
    Nov 22, 2005
  2. Shawn

    Website on a website.

    Shawn, Jan 15, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    498
    Shawn
    Jan 15, 2006
  3. sck10
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    430
    Michael Kolias
    Apr 13, 2006
  4. Adrian Wood

    Update website via website?

    Adrian Wood, Feb 22, 2004, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    714
    Adrian Wood
    Feb 25, 2004
  5. Skybuck Flying

    Call oddities: &Test() vs &Test vs Test

    Skybuck Flying, Oct 4, 2009, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    745
    Skybuck Flying
    Oct 4, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page