* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Curt Olson) [2003.09.30 17:37]: > Cameron Moore writes: > > First of all, thanks, Andrei. The new design looks awesome. I've > > wanted to take a stab at redesigning the site for a long time, but > > haven't had time, which turned out to be a good thing since you appear > > to be better at it than me. :-) Here's MHO: > > > > Pros IMHO: > > - Logical navigation > > - Nice clean design > > - Nice use of CSS > > - Overall it brings the site into the 21st century > > What can I say, I learned html in the 20th century back when there > were more gopher servers than http servers. :-) Probably most of you > are saying gopher what? ... gopher was kind of like a text only web > server. The first web server I installed was dual gopher/http. You > set up your pages in a funky way so that they could be server with > either gopher or http protocols depending on what the client wanted. > Ahhh the good old days.
I'm just a kid I guess (25), but I do remember gopher servers. I got onto the net about the time HTTP was taking over. I do remember getting onto a gopher server once and couldn't figure out what good it was compared to HTTP. :-] > > Cons IMHO: > > - No DOCTYPE specification[1] > > Anything you can give me to paste into the header. Use this: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd";> > > - Makes maintaining documentation a pain. For example, the FAQ page is > > no longer a self-contained doc. Possible solutions: > > o Use frames (never!) > > o Use SSI (in faq.html put <!--#include="FlightGear-FAQ.html"-->) > > o Update FAQ output procedure to include new design elements (not a > > big fan of this one) > > Yeah, some of the autogenerated stuff might be better without the > wrappers or else with the SSI stuff ... I'll have to poke around and > see if I need to enable this on the web server side???? In apache use "Options Includes". There are some issues that would need to be resolved to make this work properly with all the docs, some of which will be more trouble than their worth. For the docs that can easily be worked with, it would be nice to use Andrei's design. For the others, it should be fine to just leave them alone. We don't want to over-complicate the Docs section. > > My personal preference would be to use SSI in order to make the > > documentation updates easy for everyone. If we only use the "include" > > SSI directive, it's should cause minimal load on the webserver. > > > > But anyway, the new design looks great, and I'm glad Andrei was able to > > step up and knock it outta the park. Great job, Andrei. > > Yes, it looks really nice ... but there are a few loose ends to clean > up like you say. [ Caution: Pet peeve ] I noticed that you are using complete URLs in the links now (such as <a href="http://www.flightgear.org/Docs/";></a>). You can accomplish the same effect by using an absolute link like so: <a href="/Docs/"></a>. Notice it starts with a slash. Doing this will save 25 bytes for every link on the page. -- Cameron Moore [ The sooner you fall behind, the more time you'll have to catch up. ] _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
