JeevesBond — Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:22:05 +0000

One small tip: You can specify different style sheets according to whether the user is printing or viewing the page on a screen (amongst other things I wont specify here). Try setting-up another CSS file optimising the page for print, then add another element to you with the attribute "media" set to "print" e.g.

This is where the wonders of semantic markup really start to work, unfortunately you have set widths on all your td's so options are limited - have you considered using tags for structure instead? Then you can specify widths in css and vastly cut-down the amount of code needed on each page.

Tables are for displaying data in a tabular format! Semantic markup is the future!

artsapimp — Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:28:56 +0000

The website has been setup to work exactly the same with IE as it does with Firefox. If you know of a function that does not work the same please let me know so I can fix it.

The content is in a small area so users can print the page at any time without having to take an additional step of moving to a "printer friendly" page. The content within this tool can all be housed within this small of a space, so even when more content is available the size will not change.

I have considered guest reviews. I will most likely be adding that as a service, but only to users sent for the purpose of reviewing a specific site. A site will have a button (88 x 31) that says something like "review my site @ w3reviews.com" and when a user clicks on it they will have the ability to review the site without creating a reviewer account. As of today, I don't plan on making that available for regular users of the site.

webads101 — Tue, 25 Jan 2005 06:06:41 +0000

I am using Firefox more than using IE.

Why is the content area so small? It occurs about 1/3 of my browser diaplay window. Do you plan to increase the size when you have more content?

Do you consider to provide Guest review without sign up?

artsapimp — Fri, 21 Jan 2005 21:05:24 +0000

Alright, I couldn't wait. Firefox is installed, the login has been corrected, and everything looks great to me. Please keep testing and let me know what I'm missing.

still pending - border around reply box.

artsapimp — Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:44:16 +0000

A border is a great idea for the reply box. I will be setting it up sometime tonight.

The site is still in it's testing phases, but if you would like to setup your account now and start getting reviewed that is a great way to test the site. You are welcome to get started today, just understand that changes will be made in the next couple of weeks.

I will be getting firefox this weekend. Until then, I am unable to troubleshoot why the login works in IE and not in firefox.

heebiejeebieclu — Fri, 21 Jan 2005 19:29:50 +0000

Ok, I have tested it in IE looks great in that.
Went back into firefox, worked. Is this becuase i have stored the images from when i went in ie? Anyway, great job in IE
login doesn't work for me in firefox

jdiben — Fri, 21 Jan 2005 17:17:41 +0000

I like the idea of having a number rating for the different elements of the reviewed website. It looks great and I will definatly sign up. The only thing I would change is the Post Reply box. It should have a border.

Are still testing or are you ready for real members yet?

Joe

artsapimp — Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:55:01 +0000

I have lightened the blue a little and created a reviewer account for webmaster-forums.net users. I realized the important parts of the site were not being reviewed because nobody had access. Below is the login information so you can test the functions.

username: wmforums
password: wmforums

Thanks for your help

artsapimp — Fri, 21 Jan 2005 05:18:03 +0000

Great, thank you.

I launched netscape and found what was happening. All of the reports above were true with Netscape, so I fixed as many as I could.

The resolution it was designed for was 1024 x 768. On my development machine I am running 1280 x 1024 and it looks fine to me. I wanted the users to be able to print any page and any time without having half of the screen cut off, which is why I chose such a small page structure. The structure can be changed, but because of the gradiant background a lot of images would have to be recreated and the primary site structure would need a major overhaul. I would like to avoid that if possible. Let me know if you think this would make a big difference or if this change can be skipped.

Even with Netscape, the dark blue text looks how I was hoping. I am definately here for valuable feedback, which I believe everyone's comments are, but let me explain my thoughts on the dark blue and tell me if I have made a mistake or not.

I wanted the dark blue to be exactly what it is, too dark to draw any attention to. On my screen it is definately readable, but doesn't draw any of my attention to it unless I am looking for "hidden" text. My thought was that anyone wanting to advertise on this page would read all of the text around the advertising area and then would find the instructions and the link to click on for more information. Tell me if this doesn't make sense, or if I took the dark blue thing a bit too far. I can't fix it for a few days if the final decision is that it needs to be changed.

jdiben — Fri, 21 Jan 2005 04:00:25 +0000

When clicking on ArtOfMath I get the following error

Quote: Microsoft JET Database Engine error '80040e14'

Syntax error (missing operator) in query expression '[SITEID] = 1 AND [REVIEWERID] ='.

/functions/recordView.asp, line 9

The site looks great with 800x600 resolution but any higher and there is too much empty space.

The blue text for "premium sponsorship" is too dark it makes it very hard to read.

Joe