And I should have titled this thread better as well. Not that the design is bad, but the build process is lacking IMHO.
Jeff ---- Doc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nick, > > Just by way of clarification, when I said "it _looks_ bad" I wasn't > referring to the visual aspect of the design, but rather the execution. > > Cheers > Steve > > On 06/10/06, Nick Lo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Also, I wouldn't even say it "looks bad" as visually it's much better > > than a lot of sites (aside from little things like overly faint and/ > > or small text). With that in mind the only way to really say it is > > bad design is if it is inappropriate to it's requirements... which we > > don't know. > > > ---------------------------------------------- > Steve 'Doc' Baty B.Sc (Maths), M.EC, MBA > Director, User Experience Strategy > Red Square > P: +612 8289 4930 > M: +61 417 061 292 > > Member, UPA - www.upassoc.org > Member, IxDA - www.ixda.org > Member, Web Standards Group - www.webstandardsgroup.org > ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
