...

View Full Version : Review my site



quartzy
12-16-2010, 12:10 AM
I am working on a website www.leeoasis.org.uk would welocme any reviews

feltcap
12-27-2010, 08:51 PM
Hi,

First off I would recommend removing the www subdomain, instructions can be found here (http://no-www.org/faq.php). Whatever your thoughts on www being deprecated, in your specific case I would say shortening the URL would be a benefit.

Secondly, you have no favicon. Ideally you would use your company logo, but in your case a recycling symbol could be appropriate. Use a scalable image so that the favicon looks right in the URL bar as well as if it is used on the desktop as a shortcut.

Thirdly, look into cruft free URL's (removing the .html from or what have you from the URL). I spent a long time reading on them and did not really find a very good page to recommend.

Also, your page titles have some variance. As a general rule I think you should have page PageTitle - SiteTitle, with the home page just being SiteTitle. So your home page would be Lee Oasis, while your 'about us' page would be About Us - Lee Oasis. This preserves the page title when multiple tabs are open and their visibility reduced.

I hope some of that can be useful!

007
12-27-2010, 10:10 PM
Hi,
Thirdly, look into cruft free URL's (removing the .html from or what have you from the URL). I spent a long time reading on them and did not really find a very good page to recommend.


I did removed the .html on my site not to long ago so can probably give you some advice on that, as i agree its hard to find a site that puts it plainly what you need to do.

If you want to remove the .html, i recommend making folders in the php_html directory on your hosting bit. Call the folders what you want the page to be called (for example: for the about us page, call the folder "about" and then save the about us page in that folder as "index.html". That way the about us page url will be (http://www.leeoasis.org.uk/about). You may have to relinks hyperlinks on your page though as the new directory will make the original links pointing to the page not work.

Hope that helps!

quartzy
12-27-2010, 10:31 PM
I really dont know what you all mean, I have no subdomains and what is the point of removing the .htmls?
TO the bit about site title and page title I am just lost here too.

DanInMa
12-28-2010, 08:50 PM
1. as far as using WWW. I have no idea why they are commenting on that. your site works with or without it, which is the norm.

2. in ref to HTML's, the method has several names, url rewriting being one.

here's an example of how it is accomplished on an apache server with php - http://articles.sitepoint.com/article/guide-url-rewriting

- on that note, this being such a simple design, it's not really necessary.

3. the page title issue.

if you go to home or about us, the page title is Lee Oasis Homepage

for drop in, furniture project, volunteer and appeals, the page titles are more in line with the preferred method, example Lee Oasis Drop In is the page title for Dropin.html

if you go to contact details the page title is just contact details, may want to change it to Lee Oasis Contact details

and finally on the new events you used Lee Oasis - News and Events as the page title, which is inconsistent with the other page titles because your using a Hyphen to separate the site and page title.

4. when you load the about us page the header takes up more white space for some reason, I'd look into that - looks like you have <div id="header"> in your html twice on that page.

5. I would try to use a little less of the whitespace in the header altogether, but that's just a personal preference.

Summary, I think it looks ok, but you may want to tweak the few things I mentioned specifically in 3 and 4 as well as adding a scalable favicon which was mentioned earlier.

quartzy
12-29-2010, 12:14 AM
thanks for your helpful comments, but I still do not understand how removing the html's is a good thing to do. Other than hackers which is a risk for all of us, no matter what we do.

cineweekly.com
12-29-2010, 10:43 PM
I think a lot of what they're mentioning is way to picky for a site like yours. Page Titles are important though and I would suggest putting "Lee Oasis" at the end:

About - Lee Oasis
Volunteer - Lee Oasis

The major thing I would change is the layout. I was surprised to see that it was CSS and not tables because there were a lot of invisible barriers separating blocks of content. Also, I know the green color scheme is to promote being "green" but maybe implement a complimentary color into your logo. I think in your shade of green it would be a purpleish color: http://www.color-wheel-pro.com/color-schemes.html

quartzy
12-29-2010, 11:07 PM
thanks for taking a look at my site, I wonder why you would change the layout? My non paying client did not want anything garish except for green, I did intially have a contrasting purple colour for the links, but she did not want it so I removed it.

The layout was my first at using fluid widths and it was difficult enough, to do. There are sections that seem invisible but they are all there for a purpose. ie to separate what other wise would have been long amounts of text and thus boring to read. And to separate unrelated pieces of content.

Had a look at your site too, and I like it, though not too sure about the massive ad on the top of each page. The layout is pleasing to the eye and the borders are great.
Not sure if I like the centring of the text as in most sites text is on the left and I am sort of used to that. Like the shaped boxes. Possibly a litte too much text on some of the pages.

cineweekly.com
12-29-2010, 11:46 PM
By layout I really mean the layout of the content not the overall layout. Like on the Furniture Project page "We Always Need" and "We Particularly Need" are just kind of thrown out there. Now that you mention the fluid layout I think I know where we differ. My screen resolution is 1920x1080, when I change my browser to 1024x768 everything looks so much nicer. Here's how it looks to me: (more comments below the image)

http://www.cineweekly.com/non/non1.jpg


As for my site, I don't think the ad is massive, it's standard size provided by Amazon. Check out this similar site that is extremely popular http://www.aintitcool.com/ By centering of the text do you mean the justified alignment? Also, which pages have too much text? A site is all about the content afterall.

quartzy
12-30-2010, 12:00 AM
Looking more closely at your site, I see that text is indented on each paragraph and this makes it look out to me, when it probably is not really, tried to find long text but could not this time. To me it is just the indents that make the layout look funny to me, the rest of the text is properly aligned but it is just my opinion. HaHa did I say massive, for the ad, just meant it is quite noticable.

cineweekly.com
12-30-2010, 12:16 AM
I guess I unconsciously added indented paragraphs to make it less like a blog and more like a magazine. Compared to other sites like joblo.com (http://www.joblo.com) and moviefone.com (http://www.moviefone.com) I think my site's pretty lite on the ads.

Do you see what I mean about your site in larger screen resolutions? The best solution would be to set a max-width which would still make it fluid but just up until it starts looking too stretched out.

quartzy
12-30-2010, 01:45 PM
yes, thanks for that, would be a good idea on the container, though I wonder why people bother with fluid if that is the problem.

teedoff
12-30-2010, 05:05 PM
Fluid sites work the opposite way as well. That way when someone views a site on an older 800x600 monitor, the page elements dont stack and break the flow.

Also a fluid design works well unless you have non fluid elements in your page. Text for example. If you set a font size on your text and your site is viewed on a very large screen, the font will look so small. Other elements that aren't fluid will move away from each other when the screen size is larger, when they should be "growing", for lack of a better word, with the rest of the page.

quartzy
12-30-2010, 05:11 PM
should I make a minimum width as well, as in 800px the site does stack. I just thought that everyone has 1024 now.

cineweekly.com
12-30-2010, 08:58 PM
If you're going to set a minimum width too there isn't much reason to have a fluid layout. Of course it will be good for resolutions between the two you specify but it would be easier to just have a set width. When I did that for my site, I coded to work on a minimum of 1024 and it seems to be fine.

teedoff
12-31-2010, 05:08 PM
If you're going to set a minimum width too there isn't much reason to have a fluid layout.

Well, with a min width, it would be like designing a sight for an 800x600 width screen res, but having the fluidness to expand when a user has a larger view ports. So yes it does work well that way.

Also by setting a min width, when someone minimizes their browsers, your elements wont stack provided you've design your page correctly.

quartzy
12-31-2010, 06:30 PM
I have designed my site correctly but they still stack, I have used mainly fluid divs.

cineweekly.com
12-31-2010, 09:51 PM
Well, with a min width, it would be like designing a sight for an 800x600 width screen res, but having the fluidness to expand when a user has a larger view ports. So yes it does work well that way.

But the thing is, I had suggested a max-width as well since everything is too spread out on larger resolutions. I'm only working with 1920x1080 and that's not all that large. That's why it would make more sense to just have a set width, roughly 768 to be safe.

quartzy
12-31-2010, 11:15 PM
I never know what to do as there is good and bad with all kinds of width settings. Fluid, fixed and elastic and accessibility/browser issues too. I hate web design

cineweekly.com
01-01-2011, 08:14 AM
I never know what to do as there is good and bad with all kinds of width settings. Fluid, fixed and elastic and accessibility/browser issues too. I hate web design

Don't get frustrated just do what looks best on MOST browsers. There's always going to be someone with a ridiculously wide monitor (or dual or tri-monitors) and then there's the people using IE6 that some suggest you code for but you can't please everyone. I personally don't see a thing wrong with using a fixed width layout for this site.

Then there's always Wordpress too.

quartzy
01-01-2011, 01:56 PM
My last site was 1024 maybe I shoud have stuck to that, I agree we should cater for IE6 here in UK many offices and homes still use XP.
thanks :)



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum