Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > pet project done!

Reply
Thread Tools

pet project done!

 
 
Mark A. Boyd
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-22-2008
richard posted in alt.html:

> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:23:56 -0700, richard <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>http://oldies.1littleworld.com/
>>
>>Well I finally got the last section of it done this morning.
>>The top 100 charts show cashbox and billboard side by side.
>>
>>I'll now be working on a way to show a calendar within the song names
>>list so you can see how they ranked each week.

>
> So WTF am I supposed to do people?
> Draw viewers a frickin road map to the scroll bar?


Do you often visit sites where clicking something doesn't appear to change
anything?

> Like sheesh, it's as if you people never saw a web site with a scroll
> bar before.


If you don't understand the "below the fold" concept, I'm sorry I mentioned
it.

> Yes I have tested the site in varying fonts and font sizes just to see
> how it would look. I am aware of the problem and am trying to fix it.
>
> I don't expect viewers to have such extreme fonts.


Speaking for myself, just the default font and size for FireFox 2 on Windows
XP.

Your CSS suggests the larger font size to use (twice with different specs for
..a1).

I hope you don't get bent all out of shape for my mentioning it.


--
Mark A. Boyd
Keep-On-Learnin'
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Chaddy2222
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-22-2008


Ed Jay wrote:

> richard wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:09:33 -0700 (PDT), Chaddy2222
> ><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>richard wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 10:55:40 -0700 (PDT), Chaddy2222
> >>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >richard wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> http://oldies.1littleworld.com/
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Well I finally got the last section of it done this morning.
> >>> >> The top 100 charts show cashbox and billboard side by side.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I'll now be working on a way to show a calendar within the song names
> >>> >> list so you can see how they ranked each week.
> >>> >It looks like something strate out of 1997.
> >>> >Also new website should be coded in strict HTML! As you are not
> >>> >transitioning from anything.
> >>>
> >>> Your puny little opinion has been duly noted and archived in the
> >>> recycle bin.
> >>To be honest, I really don't give a ****!
> >>It is your crap website after all.

> >
> >I took a gander at your so called portfolio. The radio station site is
> >just as childish as your home page. The other one is just as bad.
> >Why do you highlight lines like that? You'd probably be better off
> >making that area a division then coloring the division background.
> >Along with some line seperation.
> >

> Some day in the future, you're going to read this exchange, and feel
> terribly embarrassed at how childish it is.
>
> richard, every constructive input directed to your pet project has been met
> with your defenses. Can't you stand the heat of well-intentioned criticism?
> Notwithstanding the incredible risk I perceive I face, I'll attempt to
> convey good news and bad news to you.
>
> The good news is that other than neglecting the Fifties, the real birth of
> the 'Oldies,' your site idea and service is good. (You might enjoy the files
> in <http://www.edbjay/top40_1930-2000.zip>. Lists all the #1 hits from 1930
> to 2000.)
>
> The bad news is that if you want to be proud of your site, you are not close
> to being finished. IMO it's an error in judgment to not use strict. (Think
> standard...not quirks.) But, I like your IFrame reasoning. Then, there's the
> esthetics...the site sucks, big time. In a nutshell, your content appears
> good, if but incomplete; it's now time to pay attention to artistic design.
> Good luck.
>

I think your comments are fare on this Ed. But as an example what do
you think of my main site.
In other words, do you think it is as bad as some people think it
is.Keeping in mind that it does meet the needs of the target market.

--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
dorayme
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-22-2008
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Sherm Pendley <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> browsers
> don't do nearly as good a job at resizing as an image-editing app like
> Photoshop or Gimp will do.


In general, no. But the common man would be hard put to tell the
differences if the images were sized down by up to 75% (perhaps even
more) by many modern browsers.

--
dorayme
 
Reply With Quote
 
richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-22-2008
On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 07:33:32 +0200 (CEST), "Mark A. Boyd"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>richard posted in alt.html:
>
>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:23:56 -0700, richard <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>http://oldies.1littleworld.com/
>>>
>>>Well I finally got the last section of it done this morning.
>>>The top 100 charts show cashbox and billboard side by side.
>>>
>>>I'll now be working on a way to show a calendar within the song names
>>>list so you can see how they ranked each week.

>>
>> So WTF am I supposed to do people?
>> Draw viewers a frickin road map to the scroll bar?

>
>Do you often visit sites where clicking something doesn't appear to change
>anything?
>
>> Like sheesh, it's as if you people never saw a web site with a scroll
>> bar before.

>
>If you don't understand the "below the fold" concept, I'm sorry I mentioned
>it.
>


I know what you meant. When I see the scroll bar doesn't go all the
way to the bottom, that tells me there is more than I can see. Isn't
that the basic reasoning behind a scroll bar?

Generally, when I view a site, I have a look down the entire page
before I go clicking on anything.


>> Yes I have tested the site in varying fonts and font sizes just to see
>> how it would look. I am aware of the problem and am trying to fix it.
>>
>> I don't expect viewers to have such extreme fonts.

>
>Speaking for myself, just the default font and size for FireFox 2 on Windows
>XP.
>
>Your CSS suggests the larger font size to use (twice with different specs for
>.a1).


I don't try assigning fixed font sizes except where I feel it's
necessary. I mainly rely on em's for sizing. I don't like reading
sites that use fixed sizes like 8pt or less. I try to let the user use
his own.

I also avoid setting font families unless I want to try for a certain
look.

KISS. Keep It Simple, Stupid.






>
>I hope you don't get bent all out of shape for my mentioning it.


Just an average day.
 
Reply With Quote
 
cwdjrxyz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-22-2008
On Aug 21, 11:23*am, richard <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> http://oldies.1littleworld.com/
>
> Well I finally got the last section of it done this morning.
> The top 100 charts show cashbox and billboard side by side.
>
> I'll now be working on a way to show a calendar within the song names
> list so you can see how they ranked each week.


You appear to have been working on your site, so what I say may or may
not still apply.

A line of code "<div><li>Billboard" appears after html is closed. I
assume this is garbage that got in by accident. If you remove it from
the source code and validate at W3C using direct code input, the page
will validate as html 4.01 transitional and as css.

You can also validate as html 4.01 strict at w3c using direct code
input and overriding the transitional Doctype. Here you get about 7
errors as strict. There are a few "strict" things such as name not
being allowed. However the main errors are related to iframe, as html
4.01 strict does not allow iframes or regular frames either. In other
words, you can not use iframes in html 4.01 strict if you wish to
validate. However iframes still usually will work in 4.01 strict if
you do not mind the validation errors related to their use.

I am not going to mention anything about how the page looks, just the
above technical comments concerning code. You have had plenty of
comments from others concerning the looks of the page.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Travis Newbury
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-22-2008
On Aug 22, 1:36*am, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-
(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In other words, do you think it is as bad as some people think it
> is.Keeping in mind that it does meet the needs of the target market.


"Bad" is in the eyes of the beholder. To me, I think the site looks
childish and amateur. It looks like a site that I would expect to see
from a 6th grader. Graphically it is even worse. But that's me.
Others find the things I like in a site to be very distracting. They
might say your site is awesome.

Bottom line, does your site do it for you and your target audience?
If so, then good job, that is what you are trying to accomplish. With
the exception of code specific issues (which are measurable) asking
how someone likes your site as meaningful as asking someone what their
favorite color is...

Then arguing with they about why they are wrong...

--
Travis
Flash Crap: http://travisnewbury.blogspot.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Travis Newbury
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-22-2008
On Aug 21, 10:44*pm, Sherm Pendley <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Is *any* web site ever really done?


Aren't those lyrics from a Chicago song? Does anyone really care?

--
Travis
Flash Crap: http://travisnewbury.blogspot.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Sherm Pendley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-22-2008
Chaddy2222 <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> I think your comments are fare on this Ed. But as an example what do
> you think of my main site.
> In other words, do you think it is as bad as some people think it
> is.Keeping in mind that it does meet the needs of the target market.


Good color choices for the most part. Many people forget (or never
knew) the concept of a palette, with the result of an "angry fruit
salad" look of every color in the rainbow.

The exception being the footer - it's a little too low-contrast to be
easily readable.

There's one validation error, but it's for an id attribute in a meta
element. Given that browsers are required to ignore attributes they
don't know about, I don't think that's doing any real harm.

The footer is indented at the right and left by a tiny amount - just a
pixel or two, I think. That gives the impression that you tried to
make it aligned with the body margins, but failed somehow. Also, (and
this is related) the left margin of the body text does not line up
with that of the nav bar.

One principle in graphic design is establishing lines for the eyes to
follow. The body text and nav bar text should share the same left
margin. The left and right borders on the footer should line up with
either the borders of the body and navbar, or with the text margins in
those elements.

The logo looks like something one could do in about 30 seconds with
one of the GIMP's logo maker scripts. The border on its right and
bottom looks like a failed attempt at a drop shadow.

Overall, it strikes me as being made by someone with a reasonable
intuitive sense of what looks good and what doesn't, but no formal
training in graphic arts or design.

sherm--

--
My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
 
Reply With Quote
 
Sherm Pendley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-22-2008
Travis Newbury <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> On Aug 21, 10:44*pm, Sherm Pendley <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Is *any* web site ever really done?

>
> Aren't those lyrics from a Chicago song?


I can't recall the lyrics to a single Chicago song, so I have no
idea.

sherm--

--
My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ari Heino
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-22-2008
>> Perhaps that would be better served as a separate page rather than in a
>> frame? Or, if possible, with a named anchor?

>
> I prefer the iframe as then you don't have to hit the back button or
> close out another window. Things may change in the near future as I
> have changed this thing a dozen times at least.


Doesn't this prove that even you are unsatisfied with the current solution?

--
Ari
http://users.utu.fi/athein/
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
finally put my pet project back online richard HTML 10 08-08-2008 03:53 PM
"Please enter a more secure.." error in Pet Shop 4.0 John Dalberg ASP .Net 2 02-28-2006 05:35 PM
Java Pet Store Demo 1.3.2 trouble amitg@cse.iitb.ac.in Java 1 06-29-2005 06:33 AM
Pet fish (tank) problem Brian Computer Support 18 05-26-2005 06:42 PM
personal pet hate Rob HTML 20 12-05-2003 11:54 AM



Advertisments