BeamEnds Ltd - Shameless Plug

I very much agree, and all my sites are done in that way.

Regards. Mark.(AKA, Mr.Nice.)

Austin, Did you know your page validates to W3C HTML 4.01 providing you add the "1" to your Document Declaration :)

^ Steve.

On or around Fri, 11 Mar 2005 18:35:29 +0000 (UTC), Stephen Hull enlightened us thusly:

nope. not bad, considering it was knocked up on mozilla/netscape composer.

Well done and I don't mean that in a condescending way BTW :)

Steve.

The content is what is important but the look can help a great deal in presenting the content. TBH the darkish green background is a bit drab and dark, makes the site "depressing" IMHO. Austins lighter tricycle site has a more uplifting feel. On Austins site he needs (IMHO) to work out how to get text to flow around an image and put either space between or a border around images.

I'm in the middle of rewriting my weather site, making use of PHP and CSS to enable a consistent look to all pages and make maintaining it a bit easier. I'm also taking the opportunity to get it to pass W3Cs XHTML Strict v1.0 and CSS validations.

I probably wouldn't either but they blink in the right hand animation.

Yes, presumably a missing image but *all( the alt texts of all the other images in that table say "[Home]"...

Donno either but what I was trying to point out is that IE and Netscape based browsers (aka Firefox) handle alt text differently.

Firefox handles alt text like it is suppose to be handled, as an alternative text if the image won't load. IE uses the alt text as mouse over text. The title element should be used for mouse over text and this is what Firefox does use.

Is there a simple guide to what should be in a webpage. I just use my webspace to post simple images and text using notepad and typing in any html code but would like to know what I should be doing.

AJH

On or around Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:01:03 GMT, Stephen Hull enlightened us thusly:

there will be a table on the site eventually, this will be the price list.

On or around Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:16:26 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Liquorice" enlightened us thusly:

fair cop, maybe a border. However, it (is supposed to) still work reasonably down to 800x600 resolution - the 2 images stuck together like that should add up to a bit under 800.

In news:9ab2e7494d% snipped-for-privacy@btconnect.com, beamendsltd blithered:

Thank you kind sir. A vast improvement.

I think it's something to do with Chromatic Aberration from which it seems many people suffer, or maybe it's my glasses that suffer. I seem to be incapable of focusing both colours at the same time. With the green background dominating, the red text at best hovers and at worse pulsates. Not a pleasant experience. Has been known to trigger horrendous migraine. I freely admit though it is probably me that's aberrant.

In news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, Austin Shackles blithered:

Agree, you're trying to sell LR parts ect not cutesy sites.

So they do, though the href links within them work albeit they all point to the main index.html page, probably not yet implemented.

The missing image is "DiscoveryIII.gif", I'm sure Richard will fix it when he's got the time.

They do have there differences but I've never really analysed them too much only made small comparisons.

Indeed,

Steve.

If you simply add correctly nested tables the page will still validate :)

Steve.

Post you URL and we'll take a look ;)

It does depend on what you want to display and who your intended target audience may be. If you create a HTML page and then run it through the W3C validator

Below is a basic HTML page, all you do is put your information between the body tags.

A simple test page

A very simple example of HTML

Steve.

Each browser on each OS get something wrong with these - they are transorned from a series of vector drawings, the originals unfortunatly having got lost.

er, it's meant to be lumpy - needs repair!

Nothings been anywhere near anything by Mickysoft or the like - it's all home grown.

Richard

Richard

It seems to largely down to the computer type used. Red on green on a PC is not nice (I just checked), but on the MAC and ROS machines I look at it comes out very nicely - I suspect it's down to video controllers, as the Net Safe green and red I use are very garish on PC's (which does seem to make a bit of a nonsense of the Net Safe colours!).

Richard

On or around Fri, 11 Mar 2005 20:51:27 -0000, "GbH" enlightened us thusly:

It's also something about different focal lengths for different colours of light. Pure red on pure blue is even worse. I've done quite a bit of study of "nice" colours to look at on colour schemes.

One of the things I try and do on websites is to have consistent colours (background, title blocks etc.) throughout the site. The other thing is to try to avoid things that will affect the colour blind, for example, though that's more tricky - there are things you can get that simulate various kinds of colour blindness, but last time I tried one I didn't get it to work.

I've got no excuse for not using you now ;)

I think that you should re-arrange your main page slighty to make it easier to get to the parts listing - which is what i imagine most people will use the site for?

You could duplicate your navigation links bit up at the top of the page, or make it so that the logo and the 'landrover spares' text is clickable and takes you directly to the parts listing.

It might be that i'm just lazy!, but i like to get to the parts list as quickly as i can (since thats what i went there for), and at the moment i have to scroll the page down first and find the right button to click on before i get anywhere. The main parts index should be above the writing too.

It always annoys me where i have to scroll down through pages to find all the links - they should be where i can get to them easily.

This is just my opinion, so feel free to ignore me!