View Full Version : Dating Site

08-26-2005, 02:30 PM
Reviews on this design please -

acc endo- dat ing. co.uk/test/

Take out the spaces... sorry to be a pain but I don't want search engines indexing it (company's not up and running yet).

I've gone through about 10 designs now, but I'm pretty happy with this one. Seems to display well on 800*600, 1024*768, in IE/Win and in FF. :)

Tristan Gray
08-26-2005, 03:04 PM
Header font needs to be different. Generally I like the tone of the site. It makes the on-line dating thing seem less weird and socially unacceptable. That being said the tone of the website is almost too formal, especially with a slogan like "the personal touch". I'd consider adding some small border or something to the little image. By the way, good choice on the image of the couple. They are decent-looking, but they look real which will help people relate.

The site isn't all that inviting yet though...

08-26-2005, 03:48 PM
By the way, good choice on the image of the couple.

Where/where can I meet her???? :)

I would reduce the size of the text to around the size of what you see in this site. and I would test out the effects of adding borders etc to the menu tabs just to try to give a bit of a 3d feeling to the page - y'know less, flat, like paper.

Subjective, I know but, I think the colours are a bit - strawberries in a strawberry mousse'. Hoping not to offend but richer, perhaps darker (winey) would be my thought with a cream pages background maybe? I hasten to add that the design pert of my brain is very small and they say, size matters. :)


08-26-2005, 05:14 PM
Thanks for the comments.

Pic was from a stock image site, still in the process of requesting permission to use it though.

The text isn't finalised yet, it's just what the client has got so far.

I'll try and take on board the things you said. :p

08-26-2005, 05:35 PM
I agree with Tristan, the site does look rather formal - the colours, and especially the picture, make it look like a wedding rather than dating site. I think it could do with some more imagery (perhaps just a few subtle gradients or patterns); it looks like a CSS site with images disabled.

That said, I like the way it has been laid out (although at higher resolutions the menu isn't level at the content box. Finally; I think the site needs a logo of sorts, especially as the name itself suggests nothing about the company (it could be anything from an acoountant's to a zoo's site for all I know).

I think it's pretty damn good - just doesn't look finished :) .

08-26-2005, 09:12 PM
Thanks, well I try and take everything said on board, still in creation obviously which is why I'm asking for opinions! I'll try and create a logo or something, and have a look at creating some gradients. :)

08-26-2005, 09:30 PM
Another dating site, huh... hope your plan B is good.

08-26-2005, 10:11 PM
I am building the site.. not running the business! :rolleyes:

08-26-2005, 10:58 PM
Hehe... good for you.

Green Beast
08-27-2005, 08:28 AM
Hello Mark,

In general: I really like it, scales beautifully. Tweak it a bit and it'd stay intact at 640x480, not that that's much of a concern. It breaks now at 678px. As others have said it does have a certain formality to it -- right angles can do that. More imagery (additional couples and some natural element, sky, water, or flowers, but no animals, hehe) and a general softening is really needed, not to the point of a wedding site, but something more casual. (Something which screams sex -- just kidding). I would consider changing the font. Less constrast a bit, slightly smaller... 90% maybe, Trebuchet or even Georgia, something with a little style to it, but staying within the small font selection that assures the broadest possible availablity. The two I mention are both on that list. I like the colors, though the background is gray in Firefox and white in IE. If you want it to be white, then you need to specify that. The only font I see on it that fits somewhat is the heading and h2 subheading/byline, the latter due to its small caps font variant and letter spacing. Nice. Accessible text.

From an accessibility standpoint: I would suggest a link to Jump to Content and a Site Map. I would also think a Privacy Policy would be mandantory on a site of this type. Maybe even an Accessibilty Statement.

Mark-up/CSS: The quote should be a blockquote if it'll have greater length. The quote marks at the very least need to be done as &_quot; (remove underscore, close space), or better yet, &_#8220; TEXT &_#8221; for typographers' quotes. Now someone else reading this may scream noooooo and tell you to use <q>Text</q> for a short snippet, but the trouble is is that it's unsupported by IE, and there's no CSS workaround with text quotes (image yeah but...) the way you can do with abbreviations using a span. Now, PHP can be used if you know how (best option), and so can JavaScript, but I don't recommend the latter because you'll leave an open loophole. And then there is the q {display: none;} option allowing for the semantic approach, but then you'll have double quotes with no CSS support. So, although it is not as semantic and the passage loses value, I prefer the typographers quotes within a blockquote or used alone in-line, depend significance and length.

I think you can remove height: 100% from your body selector. Code looks pretty clean but I would suggest a strict doctype. There is absolutely no reason to fall back to a transitional. It does validate, though so that's cool. I'd put the image border on the image itself, complete with whitespace, and not the div holder. That way if images are off, the user won't get a little empty box (a box due to the div padding) OR use some alt text instead of making its value null. The "Welcome" heading clears the wide borders on the banner so that works. It's a little odd looking, but then again, not many folks have colors turned off. You should remove the body padding body {padding:0;} in the body selector so you lose the space in Opera 8.x. Otherwise it looks the same in the top four so kudos to you. I'd darken the a:hover background link color. with the light background the change is too subtle. Maybe you could put a border on three sides (top, left, right), as that'd help too perhaps. Declare a language on your html tag.

SEO: Offer more meta data... of course. I know, you want to stay under the radar.

I hope this helps. The site is solid so I like the potential.
Good luck.


08-28-2005, 02:10 AM
nice colours and layout, all around good

08-28-2005, 02:27 AM
Light grey backgrounds always add a negative tone to a design, in my opinion. It sucks the "happy" right out of designs. I'd make that pure white. And the typography inside the content box could definitely do with some re-thinking. Small-caps transform on the titles would probably look better were they not bold, and possibly in a different typeface altogether. They look like poor-quality GIF images on my screen.

I think the colours and simplicity are good for a local dating site. If it were supposed to be some huge site, it probably wouldn't work. You could easily add a CSS style switcher to test various colour schemes though.

08-28-2005, 02:56 AM
to ditto the previous psts,

I would do an image witht he same font as the" Accendo" header font for the headings.

And as AAron said the grey background on the content looks drab. As it'snot suppossed to be a 'drab' site a #fff might look batter or maybe the same bg img as the pic has.

and I swear everytime I look at that pic I now that guy. Look sjust like my pal David. And on the pic thing, if you do use it, soften the light edges some.

08-28-2005, 07:29 PM
Updated it a bit now, what some of you said was a grey background, actually looked a kind of light peachy colour to me, but I've changed it now so it should be less grey!

Getting a problem where in IE, the bottom border on the h3 headings doesn't display until you scroll down and back up again. :confused: Any ideas about that?

Green Beast
08-28-2005, 08:00 PM
That's pretty odd. Maybe a z-index fix but I don't know. Perhaps try ditching the border-bottom and using a hr.

/* CSS */
hr {
border : 1px solid #906;

<!-- Markup -->
<hr />

That'll give you a 2px hr of the color you want. It's not the 1px border, but it'll work on modern browsers and might be a way around the problem.

Just a thought.

08-28-2005, 08:42 PM
Thanks, yup not the best solution but it works. I made it into a 1px line by using -

hr {
border: 0;
height: 0;
border-top: 1px solid #906;

Green Beast
08-29-2005, 05:17 PM
Yep, that works, Mark. I was being lazy figuring leaner CSS for an extra 1px of size. I'm sure there's a better fix for the real issue, I just don't know what it is.

I'm curious, did you try this to see if it would give you the same result?

hr {
border-top : 1px solid #906;


08-29-2005, 06:25 PM
Leaving out the border:0 attribute/value keeps it the same in IE, but gives the line a small kink on the left in FF :confused: , leaving out the height attribute makes the line 2px still.

I'd rather sacrifice a few bytes to keep the page looking how I want. :)

Green Beast
08-29-2005, 06:36 PM
I hear ya. That's cool. :)

09-16-2005, 02:46 PM
Up and running now at the full domain. (acce ndo-dat ing.co.uk)

Made a few minor changes and I think it looks pretty nice; scales well too. All valid, except on one page where I've used 'target=' and XHTML1.1 doesn't like that!

Any more ideas on what could be done? To me it seems a bit 'blocky' still, but I don't really want to change it too much.