New Design

[James]

Right I have now finished doing a new design for my site.

I was told from the last design to use css for layout so got a book (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/073571245X/qid=1054990230/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_3_1/026-0533548-3781218) on CSS

Had some help with a cross browser support and resolution problem. Which was fixed by CSSAngel and Harrydb. The thread that they help me on is here (http://www.codingforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=20586) .

That is the background of what has got me to this stage now i need some views on

How the code is ?
Layout ?
Apperance ?
Content ?

please post what you feel as I can not make it a better site and I can not learn if you do not.

[scroots]

a link to your site would be some use.

scroots

[James]

I knew I had missed something :D .

http://www.jamesburge.com/

[ACJavascript]

Nice site :D

My only complant would be to have the nav bar on every page. So as not to use the back button every time.

Other then that I liked it :D

[theabyss]

I love using the WDG Validator with my site because it can check my whole site at once. It also has support for checking with Custom DTDs, which I use.

http://htmlhelp.com/cgi-bin/validate.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jamesburge.com%2F&warnings=yes&spider=yes&hidevalid=yes

Here's the link to validate your site. You have a page with XHTML, but you have an HTML 4.01 DOCTYPE on it. Besides some errors in the code, very nice site indeed :thumbsup:

Just love that color scheme! :D

[cg9com]

Originally posted by theabyss
You have a page with XHTML, but you have an HTML 4.01 DOCTYPE on it.
I see a strict xhtml doctype ...

besides nothing beats the real thing:
http://validator.w3.org
:D :D :D

[bradyj]

nice site:thumbsup:

My only gripe would be the top graphic -- I don't like that it cuts off to the right... would be nice if it flowed all the way to the right (making really big waves -- which you could use as the background image) or making it fade smaller to the right. I would also make your title name stronger in that image -- either by making it darker or the waves in the background lighter.

Everyone else posted my other stuff -- otherwise, it looks great:D

[theabyss]

I like the W3C Validator because you can override the DOCTYPE being used very easily. It lacks whole site checking and Custom DTD support. Otherwise, it's perfect!

I forgot to look at the source of your page while I was validating it :o Silly me. My compliments on a table-less design. Those are very great.

Another tip, maybe you could make the content text justified? It would look nice, especially with your layout.

Lastly, I added a message to your entry about "The Most Annoying Webpage". It wasn't annoying to me :D

[James]

Originally posted by bradyj
nice site:thumbsup:

My only gripe would be the top graphic -- I don't like that it cuts off to the right... would be nice if it flowed all the way to the right (making really big waves -- which you could use as the background image) or making it fade smaller to the right. I would also make your title name stronger in that image -- either by making it darker or the waves in the background lighter.

Everyone else posted my other stuff -- otherwise, it looks great:D

I agree. After posting this thread I removed what was a black border. Once I did that I thought exactly what you did. The only problem I had it done for me so I am now going to try and learn and do one myself.

[giz]

I prefer this interface to the validator:

http://validator.w3.org/detailed.html

It lets you set the options before testing anything.

[theabyss]

Nice! :thumbsup:

[liorean]

Just a few things I saw:
- Given your layout, justifying the text in the entries would make it look really good.
- The character encoding is specified two times, with two different values. You should correct the one that is wrong (probably the HTTP header).
- The menu has a top border that is slightly more than that of the entry beside it. This makes it look a bit scewy.
- The lack of bottom border on the menu makes it look a bit "unfinished". It doesn't give that same feel for the last entry, really, but the menu ends a bit too far from the bottom of the page for it to feel really good. (You could always use a razor-thin bottom border instead of the thicker border you use elsewhere, if you don't want to add one of the same width.)

Other than that, I really like the design.

[James]

Originally posted by liorean
Just a few things I saw:
- Given your layout, justifying the text in the entries would make it look really good.
- The character encoding is specified two times, with two different values. You should correct the one that is wrong (probably the HTTP header).
- The menu has a top border that is slightly more than that of the entry beside it. This makes it look a bit scewy.
- The lack of bottom border on the menu makes it look a bit "unfinished". It doesn't give that same feel for the last entry, really, but the menu ends a bit too far from the bottom of the page for it to feel really good. (You could always use a razor-thin bottom border instead of the thicker border you use elsewhere, if you don't want to add one of the same width.)

Other than that, I really like the design.

I have done what you asked of me :)
apart from the two character encoding I can't frind the second one ?

tell me what you think of the changes ?

[giz]

You can also check your CSS for Errors and Warnings using:

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator-uri.html



There are no errors, and just 4 very trivial warnings to look at.

[James]

Originally posted by giz
You can also check your CSS for Errors and Warnings using:

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator-uri.html



There are no errors, and just 4 very trivial warnings to look at.

Yes that is why I left them like that as to me it would make the file bigger for no reason