Results 26 to 27 of 27
Thread: eh? critique please.
Jun 20, 2001, 10:41 #26
- Join Date
- Jan 2001
- FL, USA
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
I made a new set of buttons. Tell me your opinions on them.~%$-shock-$%~
Jun 26, 2001, 13:38 #27
- Join Date
- Sep 1999
- Simcoe, Ontario, Canada
- 0 Post(s)
- 0 Thread(s)
Reviw of ImagineScape http://www.imaginescape.com/
My review concntrates on the coding and some typographical issues as others have already reviewed the more general and subjective concerns. I hope you find it useful as you build and evolve your site. I used MSIE 5.5 and Netscape Communicator 4.7.
CODING ERRORS AND NETSCAPE
I took the liberty of copying the code on your index page and looking into the Netscape compatibility problem. I used Arachnophilia, an excellent freeware HTML editor available at http://www.arachnoid.com/arachnophilia/index.html by Paul Lutus, to check the code.
I cleaned up the errors and inserted comments indicating what changes were made. The revised file (is-main.html) has been uploaded to my web site at http://www.wkirton.com/free/is-home.html and works in Netscape. I can email you the file as an attachment if you prefer and care to give me an email address where it will reach you. Let me know when you have obtained a copy and I will remove the page from my site.
The main problem is that you are crossing tags or fail to put in the closing tag for a block. For example, if you use the <CENTER> tag, there must be a </CENTER> at the end of the block of code and enclosed text. MSIE will just center everything in the file from the first <CENTER> tag and ignore the fact that it was never closed. Netscape and other browsers will refuse to display anything after an unclosed tag pair.
Although the page now displays in Netscape, it isn't the same page your visitors will see with MSIE. You have used a mixture of browser specific extensions to HTML. The border color attribute for table tags, for example, is an MSIE extension and not part of the HTML specification and Netscape will ignore it. Maybe the new Netscape 6 handles it. The <SMALL> tag, on the other hand, is a Netscape extension. It works with the changes I made but you will have to rethink your coding to get the same display in both browsers.
It would be best to decide what HTML standard you are going to use and stick with it rather than mixing them. Adopting the W3C standards will give you the broadest audience but will make some formatting difficult or unavailable. MSIE extensions will not work in many browsers and will cause some horrible looking pages in other browsers but it is the most widely used. Netscape has some useful extensions and the latest release of MSIE handles most of them quite well. Netscape is declining in popularity but there are still a large number of users. It is still bundled with a number of ISP packages like Bell Canada's Sympatico, to name just one.
You create some awkward coding when creating links. Instead of confusing the browser software by enclosing a number of formatting codes to make a whole paragraph a link, why not select a word or phrase within the paragraph to be the link. You currently have this link:
"First time here?
Curious about what this site can do?
As it stands there are several HTML codes enclosed within the link tag which some browsers do not handle well if at all. Why not just enclose the text "Click here!" in the tag? It will make modifications and debugging a lot easier and really doesn't make it any harder to navigate the links, imho.
It will save you a lot of grief if you are consistent with your links. Your page currently contains a mix of relative (i.e. [dir]/[file] or just [file]) and absolute (i.e. http://www.imaginescape.com/[dir]/[file]). It would be best to decide which you are going to use and stick with it.
Having had the horrendous chore of moving my web site from a free hosting service to my own domain, I prefer the relative links. I was able to move a web site of several hundred pages in about 2 hours with relative links compared to almost a week with absolute links.
WHAT'S IT ALL ABOUT
I have read many well researched articles (many here on SitePoint) that insist you must capture your visitor's interest on the home page or they will leave your site without going further. You might consider having a brief description on your home page with an invitation to find out more about your site. By all accounts I have read this is more effective then just offering a link to another page. Perhaps something like the following would grab their attention:
"Imaginescape is an alternative directory featuring links to digital art, flash animation, programming, web technology and resource / tutorial websites! It is ideal for webmasters interested in leading edge design and simple navigation. Click here for more details."
NEW LINKS PAGE
This page, unlike your other link groups, is unbalanced from a typographical standpoint and a little hard to read. The format you have used on the other pages is much better. Why not use it on this page as well?
I wish you success with your site and hope this review has been helpful to you in some way.