yan — Sun, 13 Jun 2004 20:23:06 +0000

It looks good. I think that the colom width of the site is to narrow. You can make it 780px if you are worried about 800x600 dinosaurs.

You are killing the rest of us with those prices though

mjs416 — Tue, 08 Jun 2004 16:28:50 +0000

The portfolio section has each site you designed, flipped on its side. I didnt really like that. Maybe modify the graphics so they sit proper

fusioncroc — Tue, 08 Jun 2004 15:40:44 +0000

I like the design its good

Abhishek Reddy — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 14:28:37 +0000

stepheno wrote: I like it! XHTML here I come...
BTW, I've got content style and structure seperate: using perl/flatfile database. I'd really recommend it, its so easy to handle.

Indeed. I favour PHP/flatfile combo myself, or even MySQL where available. If you're that much of a semantic idealist (like I am ) it might be an idea to look into XML/XSL templates, in combination with perhaps PHP.

http://www.w3schools.com/xsl/default.asp
http://www.sitepoint.com/subcat/xml
http://www.php.net/xslt

Forward learning. I'm getting off-track so I'll stop here.

Megan — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 13:45:08 +0000

As previously mentioned, the top header is terrible. The font is uninspired, the symbol is confusing and forgettable, the colour is bland etc. What you might want to try is looking for a good stock photo to use as a base. Something like A List Apart does with their header area. They've actually got paintings there but you get the point.

From there down the design looks good. I agree about the photos being confusing though. Visually they look really good but the content doesn't relate.

Looking at the menu, I think it should be restyled so the text looks less like plain text and more like menu links.

I also think that the font size in the content area is way too small. I can't believe how often I have talked about this on here. You may be young with good eyesight, but not everyone is like you. Who is your target audience? They're probably adults. They may likely be over the age of 45. You know, people who aren't very tech-savvy. What do people over the age of 45 have in common? They need reading glasses! They can't read tiny text. Make your text easy for them to read! While I'm talking about text, some of your lists (particularly on the services page) don't look like lists! Why??? You've got them marked up as lists, but there are no bullet points to define them visually.

BTW, everything works fine and looks good in Opera 7.5. Good job on the code! Validates perfectly

stepheno — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 12:50:46 +0000

Quote:
Originally posted by Abhishek Reddy:
Usually, I'd list a whole bunch of advantages regarding CSS, but you've already discovered that. XHTML just goes hand in hand with CSS -- it's more accessible, and it's theoretically superior. With XHTML, you're discouraged from using s for layouts, employing tags, and you're compelled to be stricter with how precisely you open and close tags. For example, you have to "close" tags by using , and replaces . XHTML just makes more sense; it's a lot more XML-like. Consequently, you separate content and style better, present the important text in a cleaner, semantically sensible way.

I like it! XHTML here I come...
BTW, I've got content style and structure seperate: using perl/flatfile database. I'd really recommend it, its so easy to handle.

Quote:
Originally posted by jbxel:
I like "::AFFORDABLE:: ::VISUAL:: YNAMIC::" so make each one into a link to pages that tells us how affordable, how visual and how dynamic your sites are.

Thats a great idea, thanks.

Quote: I'd be tempted to make it wider and potentially lose...?

Loose as in liquid? I find that complete liquidity can get a bit out of control, so I sacrificed some for design. It is only 655px wide, so it will work well on any resolution. For this reason, I don't want it to be wider.

Quote: Change font or text size.

I've now done that.

Quote: Looks very professional , fresh and inviting.
Well done.
JB

Thanks a lot, I appreciate it.

jbxel — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 06:31:48 +0000

I like "::AFFORDABLE:: ::VISUAL:: :DYNAMIC::" so make each one into a link to pages that tells us how affordable, how visual and how dynamic your sites are.
I'd be tempted to make it wider and potentially lose...?
Change font or text size.
Looks very professional , fresh and inviting.
Well done.
JB

Abhishek Reddy — Mon, 07 Jun 2004 00:24:08 +0000

stepheno wrote: Thanks. What are the advantages of XHTML? Is there any difference at the moment?

Usually, I'd list a whole bunch of advantages regarding CSS, but you've already discovered that. XHTML just goes hand in hand with CSS -- it's more accessible, and it's theoretically superior. With XHTML, you're discouraged from using s for layouts, employing tags, and you're compelled to be stricter with how precisely you open and close tags. For example, you have to "close" tags by using , and replaces . XHTML just makes more sense; it's a lot more XML-like. Consequently, you separate content and style better, present the important text in a cleaner, semantically sensible way.

Jeffrey Zeldman provides a better introduction.

stepheno wrote: BTW: Like your sites!

:blush:

stepheno — Sun, 06 Jun 2004 23:00:33 +0000

Quote: Change your body link colours. They're underlined, which is their only salvation. But given the small font size, they're still hard to detect. You have such a lovely range of rich colours to choose from -- oranges, reds, perhaps blue too as a secondary colour -- so use one for the links.

Good point - will do. Also, I'm moving the text size up from 62.5% to 75%, (about 12pt), and changing it to veranda (more legible.)

Quote: Otherwise, it's looking good. Well done on the CSS and valid HTML. Why don't you try XHTML?

Thanks. What are the advantages of XHTML? Is there any difference at the moment?

BTW: Like your sites!

Abhishek Reddy — Sun, 06 Jun 2004 11:33:06 +0000

Change your body link colours. They're underlined, which is their only salvation. But given the small font size, they're still hard to detect. You have such a lovely range of rich colours to choose from -- oranges, reds, perhaps blue too as a secondary colour -- so use one for the links.

Otherwise, it's looking good. Well done on the CSS and valid HTML. Why don't you try XHTML?