PDA

View Full Version : My website - redesigned



axon
01-04-2005, 07:12 PM
I've just redesigned my website, let me know what you think. Special thanks go out to Ken who helped me out with the logo and Thantos for catching some css errors - thanks fellas. And thanks to Jeff for hosting it for me :)

note, most of my viewers use IE, so the site does work best on that browser, it does, however, work on FF and Opera as well.

www.amphoricdream.com

Quantrizi
01-04-2005, 07:18 PM
I've just redesigned my website, let me know what you think. Special thanks go out to Ken who helped me out with the logo and Thantos for catching some css errors - thanks fellas. And thanks to Jeff for hosting it for me :)

note, most of my viewers use IE, so the site does work best on that browser, it does, however, work on FF and Opera as well.

www.amphoricdream.com
I don't mind it...the design's pretty nice looking. That's all I can really say about the design.

(using FF 1.0 btw)

B0bDole
01-04-2005, 08:23 PM
http://img44.exs.cx/img44/1410/white4kv.jpg
White space??

Thantos
01-04-2005, 08:52 PM
http://img44.exs.cx/img44/1410/white4kv.jpg
White space??
Put the weed down man.

Axon: Currently the copyright information is showing up under the right column in opera and firefox but in IE it shows at the bottom of the page.

I would check out:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fcreativeoutlet.thejefffiles .com%2F

kermit
01-04-2005, 08:56 PM
looks nice

jverkoey
01-04-2005, 10:20 PM
I see the same whitespace.

Running firefox 1.0.

Besides that, the site is a definite improvement over the previous version. Really like it.

B0bDole
01-04-2005, 10:21 PM
Maybe I wasn't being clear, this is a better picture of the white space "gap"

http://img147.exs.cx/img147/363/space9yc.jpg

Zach L.
01-04-2005, 10:53 PM
I see the same space. (FF1.0, Mac OS X [10.3])

Thantos
01-04-2005, 11:05 PM
Ah I see what you mean. Yeah it appears to be a firefox issue

RoD
01-04-2005, 11:13 PM
i told u it was good last night what more do you need biotch!

prog-bman
01-04-2005, 11:25 PM
Rod you should know by now that no one cares about your opinion geez :)

axon
01-04-2005, 11:45 PM
Yeah that white line seems to be a FF issue only, and not a major one...I tried fixing it (not very hard though), but nothing worked.

Does anyone here have netscape? does it display ok there? what about safari, Zach L., I'm looking at you :p

axon
01-05-2005, 12:00 AM
>>I would check out:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=h...ffiles .com%2F<<

that validator is full of "poop"! some of the things, actually most, that it picks up are correct. and who the hell does closing <br>'s?

Thantos
01-05-2005, 12:18 AM
I do. In fact I type it naturally.
You can correct what it hits you on if you set your document type correctly. Most HTML is now XHTML and XHTML requires that every tag be closed.

axon
01-05-2005, 12:25 AM
weirdo ;)

well, I changed some things, like added the closing img tags, and it still says they are wrong...but the one that really get me is the first error about the meta tag...what am I doing wrong there?

edit:: mike, can you please sign on for a few minutes...I'll be by the puter till about 1:30-2 central

Zach L.
01-05-2005, 01:36 AM
Getting the same white line in Safari. :)

Thantos
01-05-2005, 02:56 AM
weirdo ;)

well, I changed some things, like added the closing img tags, and it still says they are wrong...but the one that really get me is the first error about the meta tag...what am I doing wrong there?

edit:: mike, can you please sign on for a few minutes...I'll be by the puter till about 1:30-2 central

Sorry by the time I read this it was 10 till 1 pacific.

The problem with the meta tag is that you never close it.
should be something like this (insert your own [stuff] )
<meta [stuff] />

Same thing goes for the img tags. Also img tags require that you specify an alt value. ie:
<img src="killbill.jpg" alt="Penguin in Jump Suit" />

As a note:
I saw this:

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;removed
Chaining non breaking spaces like this can have a nasty side effect of not allowing the word wrapping. So instead of wrapping around it just runs over other elements. The better option would be to put spaces between the non breaking spaces. Unless of course you don't want the word to wrap.

You could get rid of a majority of the errors just by doing a find and replace (case insenstive because you screwed up) for <br> and replace it with <br/>

adrianxw
01-05-2005, 04:14 AM
I terminate my breaks as well. I have a couple of pages on my site that have a strange white line on them when viewed with FF.

dagdarian
01-05-2005, 04:52 AM
Alround quite a nice design, might want to put some cellpadding on, for your tables. i dont like black text flush to a black border. just a thought...

axon
01-05-2005, 10:01 AM
>>Alround quite a nice design, might want to put some cellpadding on, for your tables<<

thantos would rape me if I used tables, so they are all css elements :D I did pad the boxes with content (the ones with a left border - didn't pad the title boxes though, should I?

axon
01-05-2005, 10:03 AM
The problem with the meta tag is that you never close it.
should be something like this (insert your own [stuff] )
<meta [stuff] />


that is what I have on all my meta tags...and it still says there is an error :confused:

Thantos
01-05-2005, 10:25 AM
that is what I have on all my meta tags...and it still says there is an error :confused:
Lair
From your page:

meta name="keywords" content="poetry, poems, Jakub Bomba, Milad Amani, short story, short stories, essays, essay, literature, books, creativity, writer, prose, author, creative writing">
<meta name="description" content="creativeoutlet:: place where two young writers express themselves with poetry, prose, and more.">

It should be

meta name="keywords" content="poetry, poems, Jakub Bomba, Milad Amani, short story, short stories, essays, essay, literature, books, creativity, writer, prose, author, creative writing" />
<meta name="description" content="creativeoutlet:: place where two young writers express themselves with poetry, prose, and more."/>

-KEN-
01-05-2005, 10:37 AM
Aren't meta tags (outside of content-type, etc) pretty useless anyhow? I mean, back in the day when search engines like metacrawler used meta tags they were useful, but I'm pretty sure that Google, Yahoo!, MSN, and most other modern search engines don't.

edit: Oops, I guess I'm wrong. A google for "amphoric dream" brings up "amphoric dream:: place where two young writers express themselves through poetry,
prose, random rants, and more. Amphoric Dream http://amphoricdream.com/." as one of the descriptions. I could have sworn I read somewhere that google doesn't use meta tags anymore, though.

I'm thinking that the article said that it disregards the keywords. That makes more sense, since google as a better way of linking keywords to your site.

Thantos
01-05-2005, 10:45 AM
IIRC google doesn't use meta tags to rank a site. But I do think they still give the meta description if there is one, otherwise they show a preview of the body.

ober
01-05-2005, 11:04 AM
Interestingly enough... I don't have meta tags on my site, and searches for "whproductions" and "windy hill productions" do not bring up direct links to my personal site.

axon
01-05-2005, 01:36 PM
ok, I got ird of the white line that was appearing in FF.... what caused it was a <p> tag that was not terminated in the <div> where it was declared...go figure.

axon
01-05-2005, 01:52 PM
ok I have one error left: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fcreativeoutlet.thejefffiles .com%2F

but it has something to do with the code provided by my stat counter - not sure what to do about it...any ideas?

Zach L.
01-05-2005, 02:56 PM
<random>
Whoa...
I hadn't looked too closely at the spelling of your website's name...
For some reason, I thought 'amphoric' was 'amorphic'... :rolleyes:
</random>

Quantrizi
01-05-2005, 03:35 PM
ok I have one error left: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fcreativeoutlet.thejefffiles .com%2F

but it has something to do with the code provided by my stat counter - not sure what to do about it...any ideas?
Use a better counter (http://hotscripts.com has a lot). If it's one from BraveNet or something, they usually always contain an error or 500.

axon
01-05-2005, 03:38 PM
this counter has been good to me....they give awesome stats/graphs/ and whatever else you would want....I don't think I'll be switching

B0bDole
01-05-2005, 04:03 PM
You're host should provide enough of the stats/graphs/hits, better than any counter..look into it

jverkoey
01-05-2005, 04:32 PM
Yup, web stats are provided at http://www.TheJeffFiles.com/webstats/

However, these are my global site statistics, so they won't be directly aimed at your subdomain. You can, however, see search statistics which you should be able to figure out which ones are going to your site or not.

-edit-

*looks at search hits at bottom fo page*

WHAT THE HELL IS THAT???
:mad: :eek: :confused: :(
i'm sure you'll see what I'm talking about....

-KEN-
01-05-2005, 04:44 PM
Yup, web stats are provided at http://www.TheJeffFiles.com/webstats/

However, these are my global site statistics, so they won't be directly aimed at your subdomain. You can, however, see search statistics which you should be able to figure out which ones are going to your site or not.

-edit-

*looks at search hits at bottom fo page*

WHAT THE HELL IS THAT???
:mad: :eek: :confused: :(
i'm sure you'll see what I'm talking about....

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it.

axon
01-05-2005, 04:52 PM
if you're refering to "masturbating on the beach" its a scene in one of the greatest books ever written - Ulysses. Partly because of the scene the book has been banned (when it came out) in many countries.

B0bDole
01-05-2005, 07:36 PM
> "masturbating on the beach"

I do that all the time

jverkoey
01-05-2005, 07:38 PM
Oh, ok, wasn't sure what that was, hah.

dagdarian
01-06-2005, 08:15 AM
thantos would rape me if I used tables, so they are all css elements :D I did pad the boxes with content (the ones with a left border - didn't pad the title boxes though, should I?

I would recomend it, makes it easier on the eyes.

Mister C
01-06-2005, 11:54 AM
everything here is COPYRIGHT Jakub Bomba and/or Milad Amani unless otherwise stated and may not be used without proper permission


Did you actually file for Copyright protection for this?

:)

Thantos
01-06-2005, 12:04 PM
Copyright protection is automatic and has been that way for about I decade IIRC. You are only required to file before you sue for damages. You can still sue for an injunction prior to your filing.

axon
01-06-2005, 12:47 PM
Mister C, why are you even here? seriously, don't you have a class full of students to "teach" :rolleyes:

B0bDole
01-06-2005, 05:13 PM
>Copyright protection is automatic and has been that way for about I decade IIRC. You are only required to file before you sue for damages. You can still sue for an injunction prior to your filing.

roger

cerin
01-06-2005, 05:22 PM
I use ff 1.0 and I don't have any problems.