On 3/2/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Everyone,
A new site I recently developed the front-end for over the past few
months, called Edentiti [1], has just officially launched and I wanted
to get some feedback about the usability, accessibility and over
functionality in
On 02/03/06, Rob Mientjes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks good, everything works. Just not sure about the logo and left
chunk of site. Why is that below the header bar? Is that just Safari
or was it a conscious decision? Please do explain.
Of course it was conscious, but I still don't get it.
On 3/2/06 10:31 AM, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1] http://edentiti.com/
Took _minutes_ for the home page to display, and once it did, it still
wasn't finished loading things.
Mac OS 10.4.5 Safari 2.0.3
--
Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
Media Logic
www.mlinc.com
Hopkins Programming wrote:
Why must I have javascript enabled for the site to be styled?
Um... You don't need to, although IE users without script enabled with
have a slightly degraded style (not totally unstyled) due to Dead
Edwards' IE7 script not working.
Which browser are you testing
Rob Mientjes wrote:
On 02/03/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Everyone,
A new site I recently developed the front-end for over the past few
months, called Edentiti [1], has just officially launched and I wanted
to get some feedback...
Looks good, everything works. Just not sure
Hi Lachlan,
Just a design opinion...
The main area (#main) looks a little squeezed between the rather heavy
right and left sides. Maybe make the h2 bigger and make the intro below
strong. (It is, but double strong!!... I don't know if that's why it
doesn't come up as strong on my screen
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
[1] http://edentiti.com/
The layout can't cope with any degree of font-resizing in any browser,
which I think is a weak point.
In my testing, I can resize a substantial amount before seeing any
problems occur, and even then it's just slightly
Tom Livingston wrote:
On 3/2/06 10:31 AM, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1] http://edentiti.com/
Took _minutes_ for the home page to display, and once it did, it still
wasn't finished loading things.
Mac OS 10.4.5 Safari 2.0.3
Really? Maybe the server can't cope with the load
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
It was decided by the designer and management that they wanted the logo
on the homepage to be slightly larger and more prominent as a branding
exercise, but to then move it up to the header, out of the way for all
the sub pages.
offtopic class=slightly
You may want to
Kim Kruse wrote:
Hi Lachlan,
Just a design opinion...
Ok, I'll pass it on to the designers.
The main area (#main) looks a little squeezed between the rather heavy
right and left sides. Maybe make the h2 bigger and
I know. It worked better when there was less introductory text on the
Lachlan,
It was the most semantically correct way I could find to markup the
different levels of importance. There's are other combinations of
nested em aswell (see the stylesheet).
OK. I just never seen it in use before.
I don't know if that's why it doesn't come up as strong on my
On 02/03/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It was decided by the designer and management that they wanted the logo
on the homepage to be slightly larger and more prominent as a branding
exercise, but to then move it up to the header, out of the way for all
the sub pages.
Okay, fair
Hi Lachlan,
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
/Um... You don't need to, although IE users without script enabled
with have a slightly degraded style (not totally unstyled) due to Dead
Edwards' IE7 script not working. /
Oh dear. Will there be an obituary somewhere? :-)
Site looks great overall. Nice and
Firefox 1.07. The siute stayed unstyled despite 10 or so Ctrl+F5's.
--ZacharyOn 3/2/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hopkins Programming wrote: Why must I have _javascript_ enabled for the site to be styled?Um... You don't need to, although IE users without script enabled withhave a
On 3/2/06 11:46 AM, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/2/06 10:31 AM, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[1] http://edentiti.com/
Took _minutes_ for the home page to display, and once it did, it still
wasn't finished loading things.
Mac OS 10.4.5 Safari 2.0.3
Really?
Also, when fixing this typo, you should come up with different page
titles as you currently have several pages, including For
Organisations, Partners, and Staff board details that all have
the same misspelled title. When it comes to search engine optimization,
a unique and clearly
On 3/2/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... due to Dead Edwards' IE7 script not working
Man, when did Dean Edwards die? I know his last post was in December, but I
didn't know he was *dead*
Maybe MS will make IE7 standards compliant in his honour... ;)
Paul
Felix Miata wrote:
On 06/02/20 06:32 Lachlan Hunt apparently typed:
[someone else] wrote:
Or better: Is there a way to please both groups?
Yes. Don't use small fonts.
Don't blame me, I wasn't the designer, just the implementer so I had to.
But I also wrote somewhere else in that
On 02/03/06, Kevin Futter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, it should be *who* will grin gleefully for a start.
My apologies for that typo, but it shouldn't detract from the matter at hand.
-Rob.
N���.�Ȩ�X���+��i�� n�Z�֫v�+��h��y�m�쵩�j�l��.f���.�ץ�w�q(��b��(��,�)උazX����)��
On 3/3/06 10:24 AM, Rob Mientjes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 02/03/06, Kevin Futter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, it
should be *who* will grin gleefully for a start.
My apologies for that
typo, but it shouldn't detract from the matter at
hand.
-Rob.
Partly my fault there Rob - I didn't
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Lachlan Hunt
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 10:32 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Site Check/Launch: Edentiti.com
Hi Everyone,
A new site I recently developed the front-end for over the past few
months, called
I have dialup that connects at 26.400 and it loaded very quickly for me! I
was surprised. Nice design too
- Original Message -
From: Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 10:46 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check/Launch: Edentiti.com
I am still in learning-process but in my opinion your site is excellent!
Just test your site for example at ' http://www.sidar.org '. This
validator found some problems.
What I miss is a 'skip to main content' and accesskeys.
With ff the text from the main-content overlapps the footer by using
On 2/18/06, Paul Sturgess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/16/06, Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The BIGGEST thing I can see wrong with this site is the image map.
Obviously the link areas aren't regular shapes, so even if you were to
use a UL (navigation list) with positioned LI
Bert Doorn wrote:
I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton that the designer knows best
what suits people they have never met.
Bert - Isn't that what all good 'designers' do? The 'consumers' then
decide if they like the design and whether they want it or not. There
is little point in anyone
About 4-5 months ago they built a new national library here in Norway, the architects worked alot with making the place accesible for users with different disabilites. Essentially they did everything wrong. The biggest mistake was of course not to talk with anyone blind or in a wheelchair. There
Vincent Hasselgård wrote:
When it comes to font-sizes I'd really like to blame the browsers. I
don't think it's up to us to provide tools for enlarging or shrinking
fonts, just like it's not up to newspapers to provide a spyglass with
every paper. Both Windows and MacOS are shipped with
Designer wrote:
Maybe 'provider' is a better term than designer. Or Georg's term :
'Web carpenter' is more to the point here.
Depends on what you put into that term... :-)
A good carpenter should know how to do his/her job in order to make a
building functional for inhabitants and visitors,
Designer wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:06:36 +:
Bert Doorn wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 00:22:22 +0800:
I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton that the designer knows best
what suits people they have never met.
Bert - Isn't that what all good 'designers' do? The 'consumers' then
decide if
Bert Doorn wrote:
To use similarly strong wording, I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton
that the designer knows best what suits people they have never met.
A Designer gets paid to understand their audience.
The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms
here in Silicon
Hassan Schroeder wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 05:21:36 -0800:
The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms
here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS
or any applications -- from the supplied defaults.
Where is the data that backs up this assertion? Why
Felix Miata wrote:
The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms
here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS
or any applications -- from the supplied defaults.
Where is the data that backs up this assertion?
That assertion is based on my experience
Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Felix Miata wrote:
The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms
here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS
or any applications -- from the supplied defaults.
Where is the data that backs up this assertion?
That
On 2/18/06, Vincent Hasselgård [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My argument:
Newspapers comes out with fixed font-size, but people who's got low vision
may very easily use a spyglass to read easier. People in need of a spyglass
gets themselves one. The same thing applies to web and computers, it's
Christian Montoya wrote:
How many websites do we come across with some Java or server-side
option to increase text size? It's almost as common as the XHTML and
CSS validator links. Is it really useful? No, not really...
Completely agree.
how about
if these sites had a link to a page that
Patrick H. Lauke wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 17:00:21 +:
But is it our job as web *content* developers to teach our users how to
use their browsers? The onus is on the browser developers to make their
tools more intuitive and user friendly, and to expose that functionality
to users in a much
Christian Montoya wrote:
[snip]
How many websites do we come across with some Java or server-side
option to increase text size? It's almost as common as the XHTML and
CSS validator links. Is it really useful? No, not really... how about
if these sites had a link to a page that explained how
Good afternoon,
I'm currently in the process of designing a site that resides in a dev
environment: http://dev5.headclerk.net/
It's CSS-driven and XHTML compliant. I make every effort to ensure that
I use valid, well-formed semantically correct markup, but often I'm too
close to the project to
Felix Miata wrote:
Nobody seems to want to take the first step on this. I doubt M$ will, so
it's probably up to open source contributors to make the first move, but
from what incentive? If you know any you can convince, here are two
places to start:
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 05:21:36 -0800, Hassan Schroeder wrote:
To ignore the fact that the most common browser has crap defaults
and minimal resizing capability is to abdicate your responsibilities
as a Designer.
Hassan,
With all due respect, I find that IE's default settings are just fine for
Mario,
Some of your CSS does not validate.
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css2warning=2uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdev5.headclerk.net%2F
My only major issue with the design is the Upcoming Training
background. There is not enough contrast between the type and the
background for
did you test it in firefox yet?
In ff your footer seems to break way out of the wrapper.
-best
kvnmcwebn
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting
sorry please disregard that last observation i made about your footer
breaking. i had another style sheet loaded into the page by accident
looks good
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
Thank you Justin! I've begun the process of fixing those errors.
Respectfully,
Mario
Mario,
Some of your CSS does not validate.
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css2warning=2uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdev5.headclerk.net%2F
My only major issue with the design is the Upcoming
On 2/17/06, kvnmcwebn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://63.134.237.108/
This enables a blind user to see the document and navigate it
easily.
Can your consultant find a cure for world hunger, as well as enabling
the blind to see? ;-)
**
The
-Original Message-
From: Felix Miata [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please tell us which combination(s) of display size and resolution
and
at which DPI values your description applies to:
13 on 800x600
...
13 on 1152x864 -- !!! Sadist :)
...
21 on 2048x1536
22 on 2048x1536
Less than
i might leave this site the way it is but on my next site i will try and
implement a font size adjuster.
lisa,
If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they
right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing
app, the user
could increase the font as much as they
kvnmcwebn
lisa,
If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they
right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing
app, the user
could increase the font as much as they like.
It's known as the 'Clydesdale Hack'.
can you give me an example of the
Lisa forgot to put the sarcasm tags around her content. She wasn't being
serious there...
...lisa please stop horsing around...
i guess i will have to research the issue more...
try and find the balance..
-best
kvn
**
The discussion list
kvnmcwebn wrote:
i guess i will have to research the issue more...
try and find the balance..
When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most
appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't
need to again resize just for having visited your page.
On 2/16/06, Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The BIGGEST thing I can see wrong with this site is the image map.
Obviously the link areas aren't regular shapes, so even if you were to
use a UL (navigation list) with positioned LI elements you couldn't
achieve the same effect...
May I
Felix Miata wrote:
When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most
appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't
need to again resize just for having visited your page. He's presumably
already done that in his browser.
..which is the utterly
Hassan Schroeder wrote Fri, 17 Feb 2006 07:36:35 -0800:
Felix Miata wrote:
When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most
appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't
need to again resize just for having visited your page. He's presumably
Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Felix Miata wrote:
When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most
appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't
need to again resize just for having visited your page. He's presumably
already done that in his browser.
Stephen Stagg wrote Fri, 17 Feb 2006 10:42:53 +:
From: Felix Miata [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please tell us which combination(s) of display size and resolution and
at which DPI values your description applies to:
13 on 800x600
...
13 on 1152x864 -- !!! Sadist :)
...
21
Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Felix Miata wrote:
When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are
most appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the
user won't need to again resize just for having visited your page.
He's presumably already done that in his browser.
felix,
dont mean to throw another log on the fire...but i think the font size can
vary somewhat depending on the nature of the content.
-best
kvn
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Felix Miata wrote:
When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most
appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't
need to again resize just for having visited your page. He's presumably
already done that in his browser.
Mark Harris wrote:
Then you should try educating them, rather than 'managing' them
So then educated users set their preferred font size, and then (apart
from a few sites that do the right thing and don't go below 100%) the
rest of the web appears even smaller (or in any case differently
Patrick H. Lauke wrote Fri, 17 Feb 2006 22:26:54 +:
Mark Harris wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:39:00 +1300:
Then you should try educating them, rather than 'managing' them
So then educated users set their preferred font size, and then (apart
from a few sites that do the right thing and
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Mark Harris wrote:
Then you should try educating them, rather than 'managing' them
So then educated users set their preferred font size, and then (apart
from a few sites that do the right thing and don't go below 100%) the
rest of the web appears even smaller (or in
hello i have a site that i need a bit of advice on, i got some great help
here allready for it.
..1st it dosnt validate right now but i will get it to pass after i address
some other issues.
the site was critiqued rather harshly by a third party consultant- here is
the original email.
-not
On 2/17/06, kvnmcwebn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://63.134.237.108/
any feedback at all greatly appreciated
Table-based layout? Was that guy looking at the same site? Looks
pretty layout-table free to me...
You're missing a H1, which isn't great... wrap the header image in an
H1 element
, that shouldn't take long at all.
Ted
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of kvnmcwebn
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 2:35 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] site check
hello i have a site that i need a bit of advice on, i got
kvnmcwebn wrote:
hello i have a site that i need a bit of advice on, ...
the site was critiqued rather harshly by a third party consultant-
here is the original email.
Well I had a very quick look at it and though visually the site is
nice there are a couple of serious problems, I'm
] site check
hello i have a site that i need a bit of advice on, i got some great help
here allready for it.
..1st it dosnt validate right now but i will get it to pass after i address
some other issues.
the site was critiqued rather harshly by a third party consultant- here is
the original email
Joshua Street:
The BIGGEST thing I can see wrong with this site is the image map.
Nice site. Check the typos: Skip to nazvigation (top of page).
Outside of that I mostly agree with Josh except I'd like to see the
county names as plain text and positioned instead on the map instead of
as
thanks guys,
Yes we did double check and make sure he checked the right site.
at first i thought he surely must have been checking the old site...
http://www.families.ie/
but no he was checking the right url.
The consultant is an employee of the irish government.nevermind i wont
go there.
I will do as josh suggested.
Actually using flash is a good idea for the maps especially as they are
going national and will have all counties in the republic on there.
The you are here is a breadcrumb that has yet to be programmed.
good idea on using positioned text instead of the image map
One other thing... typo, your are here » above the imagemap.
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
On 2/17/06, kvnmcwebn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can i get a second opinion on felix's advice?
It must've been offlist, but I'd guess it was about fonts ;-) My
second opinion is I agree... he's generally right about such things!
**
The discussion
kvnmcwebn:
Can i get a second opinion on felix's advice?
What did Felix advise?
kind regards
Terrence Wood.
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on
What did Felix advise?
He's right as far as he went. There's another serious accessibility
problem he didn't touch on, plus a corollary, which you can see in the
screenshot. In your CSS is an accessibility issue, as well as one of
manners: 'body {font:75%...'. Browser makers provide users with
Terrence Wood wrote:
kvnmcwebn:
Can i get a second opinion on felix's advice?
What did Felix advise?
Stab in the dark: don't define font size below 100%...
--
Patrick H. Lauke
__
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used
kvnmcwebn wrote:
What did Felix advise?
He's right as far as he went. There's another serious accessibility
problem he didn't touch on, plus a corollary, which you can see in the
screenshot. In your CSS is an accessibility issue, as well as one of
manners: 'body {font:75%...'. Browser makers
On 17 Feb 2006, at 1:31 PM, kvnmcwebn wrote:
What did Felix advise?
Let your visitors be able to use your site
without fighting through this rude and unnecessary basic
usability/accessibility obstacle. See:
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html;
I didn't really need to ask...
On 17 Feb 2006, at 00:43, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
kvnmcwebn wrote:
What did Felix advise?
He's right as far as he went. There's another serious accessibility
problem he didn't touch on, plus a corollary, which you can see in
the
screenshot. In your CSS is an accessibility issue, as well as
Yes but Patrick,
If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they
right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing app, the user
could increase the font as much as they like.
It's known as the 'Clydesdale Hack'.
L
-Original Message-
From: Patrick H.
Herrod, Lisa wrote:
Yes but Patrick,
If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they
right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing app, the user
could increase the font as much as they like.
It's known as the 'Clydesdale Hack'.
But only if the button for
Herrod, Lisa wrote:
Yes but Patrick,
If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they
right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing app, the user
could increase the font as much as they like.
It's known as the 'Clydesdale Hack'.
L
song id=yankee-doodle
Oh,
I've always wanted my own theme song.
I believe I have finally arrived.
-Original Message-
From: Mark Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 17 February 2006 12:27 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] site check: FONT sizes
Herrod, Lisa wrote:
Yes
Stephen Stagg wrote Fri, 17 Feb 2006 01:02:11 +:
On 17 Feb 2006, at 00:43, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
It's just a shame that people who pay for web design usually insist
on the smaller text sizes, because historically 99% of web sites in
the wild have tended to serve a slightly reduced
I think that requires a purchase order felix.
-Original Message-
From: Felix Miata [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please tell us which combination(s) of display size and resolution and
at which DPI values your description applies to:
13 on 800x600
14 on 800x600
15 on 800x600
16 on
David Nicol wrote:
I'd appreciate it very much if you could take a quick look at:
http://www.shetlandcoffee.com/
If you're on the home page, hovering above the top left logo won't do
anything.
If you go to About Us, both the top *and* bottom section of the logo
link you back to the home
Christian Peper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Nicol wrote: I'd appreciate it very much if you could take a quick look at: http://www.shetlandcoffee.com/If you're on the home page, hovering above the top left logo won't do anything.If you go to About Us, both the top *and* bottom section of the
Hello everyone,
What can I say? Your advice and assistance has been tremendous. I completely appreciate it.
It looks like I've got a bit of work to do sorting out a series of problems with the site. I'll get stuck into this work and will, I hope, geteverything working properly before the
ntana
De: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] En nombre de David
NicolEnviado el: jueves, 12 de enero de 2006 10:16Para:
wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgAsunto: Re: [WSG] Site Check -
ShetlandCoffee.com
Hello everyone,
What can I say? Your advice and assistance has been tremendous. I
@webstandardsgroup.orgAsunto: Re: [WSG] Site Check - ShetlandCoffee.com
Hello everyone,
What can I say? Your advice and assistance has been tremendous. I completely appreciate it.
It looks like I've got a bit of work to do sorting out a series of problems with the site. I'll get stuck into this work and will, I
Hi everyone,
I'd appreciate it very much if you could take a quick look at: http://www.shetlandcoffee.com/
All comments welcome. In particular, please let me know if you spot anything that I'd need to fix before my client begins to promote the site.
Thank you in advance.
Kind regards
David
David Nicol said the following on 1/11/2006 2:09 PM:
Hi everyone,
I'd appreciate it very much if you could take a quick look at:
http://www.shetlandcoffee.com/
All comments welcome. In particular, please let me know if you spot
anything that I'd need to fix before my client begins to
David,
Same shifting top nav thing in FF 1.0.7/Mac.
Also, the color of the top links on hover is on the light side, so that
they fade into the background a bit.
And how come we can't have two guys snogging a girl?? ;-)
Cheers,
Wendy
David Nicol wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'd appreciate it very
From: David Nicol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WSG] Site Check - ShetlandCoffee.com
: http://www.shetlandcoffee.com/
David,
Looks great! There are a few positioning problems under Opera/Win that you
might want to have a look at - didn't have
Hi Peter,
Many thanks for spotting this. I'll get on to it right away.
Cheers
David
http://www.nbcommunication.com
There appears to be some problems in FF1.5 in WinXP in your headersection.Location of screen shot:
http://www.maestropublishing.com/examples/shetlandcoffe_ss.png
Thanks Wendy,
I agree with you about the colour of the top links on hover.
With regard to the main image, it was the client who supplied this. Nothing to do with me - honest!
Cheers
david
http://www.nbcommunication.com
On 1/11/06, wendy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David,Same shifting top nav
Thomas, Collin,
Thanks for your feedback. I'll re-visit the header part again and will hopefully get it to look right in all browsers.
cheers
David
http://www.nbcommunication.com
Love the design, but just one thing about the background.
The dotted line fluctuates at the edge of each repetition, because
there are dots right on the edges. I don't know if you can
add/subtract a pixel in on one side of the graphic easily, or whether
this'll interfere with the other repeating
Three validation issues that are easy to fix http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1uri=http://www.shetlandcoffee.com/site/index.cfm
The CSS validates! There are some alignment issues as other have mentioned. The colored stripe in background seems to be too low or the content too hight??Jim
On
At 12:09 PM 1/11/2006, David Nicol wrote:
I'd appreciate it very much if
you could take a quick look at:
http://www.shetlandcoffee.com/
David,
You've got an XHTML-Strict doctype, and yet you've got a great whack of
whitespace above the doctype tag. If I'm not mistaken, this will
cause browsers
A couple of things I notice, that haven't been mentioned:
1. The Wholesale Enquiries page is right shifted compared to the
other pages
2. On at least some of the buy pages the very first anchor, a
href=http://www.shetlandcoffee.com/;img src=../images/logo.gif
class=logo alt=Shetland
On Jan 11, 2006, at 3:55 PM, Bill McAvinney wrote:
2. On at least some of the buy pages the very first anchor, a
href=http://www.shetlandcoffee.com/;img src=../images/logo.gif
class=logo alt=Shetland Coffee Company /, isn't closed. While
most browsers are being generous to you and
101 - 200 of 536 matches
Mail list logo
