On Sat, 14 Apr 2007 22:59:50 +0100, Laurence Reeves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
wrote:

> Rich Mellor wrote:
>> ...
>> Agreed, but not many people are coming forward to say which they would
>> rather use !!
>>
>>
> I thought quite a few people had come forward and most seemed to say
> which they would rather use.
> I'd rather use the Wikipedia one (as I've said before, for all the
> reasons mentioned before).

Yes a few more people have commented today

> Having finally figured out where this new Wiki is, via Google, and
> guesswork, I can now add a few more reasons, all negative.
>
> Wikipedia does not use a background. The new one does.
> Wikipedia is not very pretty. The new one is.
>
> Wikipedia I can read - it's in reasonable sized text, generally black on
> white. I have trouble reading small font, pastel on pastel.

Well the easy answer to that is for someone to come forward and change the  
style sheets for the ql_wiki to include maybe a QL picture, change the  
font size etc to something more acceptable. I know that we have one or two  
fairly decent web designers on this list.


> Wikipedia doesn't mention it, but passes W3C tests. the new one says it
> passes them and doesn't.

Maybe not - but then it does not offer text resizing, different layouts,  
colour schemes etc - neither does wikipedia (or does it).

At least we have access to the sources, and the style sheets, so could  
always make it comply.

> Wikipedia mentions me. The new one doesn't. :)
>

Well Lau, feel free to join and add a page about yourself !

-- 
Rich Mellor
RWAP Services
URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk
URL:http://www.rwapservices.co.uk

_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Reply via email to