"Lee Bradshaw" <Lee.Brads...@btinternet.com> wrote
> Please could you do a site check on http://cheapgoodsonthe.net and let me > know what you think, please.
> All comments gratefully received, whether good or bad !
Lee, I like how it looks
Few comments...
The first link on your index page just reloads the page ...perhaps this should enter the site like the second one?
You need to check you links to other site..the first one I tried (Drinks-direct) led me to a site that has now shut down! You say "All links open in their own window." - most of the ones on this page don't and I didn't check any other pages.
Check the grammar on the site.. (eg i'll should be I'll)
|| Please could you do a site check on http://cheapgoodsonthe.net and let me || know what you think, please.
Why do I have to click twice before reaching any product categories? The first two screen are unnecessary. http://cheapgoodsonthe.net/directory.html should be the first page.
Links should be underlined so we can see they are links, or is this a "mouse-over-and-find-a-link" guessing game? Why not make them "standard" blue while you're at it?
The colour scheme is a bit washed-out. Also not enough contrast between foreground and background for people with less than perfect vision.
> On this point...is it best to have 2000-2001 or just 2000 or > does it really matter?
IANAL but AFAIK you can't affect your rights with such a statement so, in short, it doesn't matter (and it wouldn't matter if you didn't have a copyright notice at all).
-- Richard Watson rich...@doilywood.org.uk GPG/PGP:0xAE411550 ICQ:65274884
> IANAL but AFAIK you can't affect your rights with such a statement
Neither am I, but although you can't affect your _rights_, in some jurisdictions it could make a massive difference to the level of damages you could get in the event of a violation.
Addressing the hon usenauts collectively (not specifically you, Richard, I presume you're better informed than average..):
Speaking as a layman and this advice is worth no more than your're paying me for it, but I'd recommend reading the Usenet copyright FAQ, which includes international considerations (part 4), not only USA. Even though I couldn't find a update later than 1994 http://www.landfield.com/faqs/law/copyright/
Its view on the topic at hand is this
Preclusion of formalities: Under Berne, copyright cannot be dependent on formalities such as registration or copyright notice (Art. 5(2)). However, as noted in sections 2.5 and 2.7, this provision apparently does not prevent a member nation from taking adherence to formalities into account when determining what remedies apply.
> "Lee Bradshaw" <Lee.Brads...@btinternet.com> wrote
> > Please could you do a site check on http://cheapgoodsonthe.net and let me > > know what you think, please.
> > All comments gratefully received, whether good or bad !
> Lee, I like how it looks
> Few comments...
> The first link on your index page just reloads the page ...perhaps this > should enter the site like the second one?
> You need to check you links to other site..the first one I tried > (Drinks-direct) led me to a site that has now shut down! You say "All links > open in their own window." - most of the ones on this page don't and I > didn't check any other pages.
> Check the grammar on the site.. (eg i'll should be I'll)
In article <94s0nj$2e...@neptunium.btinternet.com>, Lee.Brads...@btinternet.com says... ____> All comments gratefully received, whether good or bad ! ____> First off, Lee, these kinds of splash pages do nothing for a site except force users to click yet again to reach your site. You may feel they're cool, but why put unnecessary obstaceles in front of users YOU want to visit your site ?
THEN we get to yet another welcome page........but we still aren't IN the site ? come on Lee !
GEEZ ! I'm really pissed no Lee. I haven't all night to follow your yellow brick road. If you want to have fun, fine. If you want to do business ? cut the shit and let people into the site right off.
Intro page - The link on the front page back to the front page seems a little pointless. Does the page really need to scroll like that? Surely it can fit on 1 page (could put in a table 100% height so it would fit in all screens). Copyright only covers 2000 - other pages all say 2000-2001.
Home page - 1st/2nd para: should there be a line space? 2nd para: due to their (not THERE). Standardise whether the copyright or the designed by lines are going to be last - varies on different pages.
Directories - Maybe list the web pages alphabetically rather than page 1, page 2 - this will work out better as the site expands even more.
Afraid I haven't time to pick at much more - but all in all looks a clean site, good use of colour and links - good luck with it!
Ali ;)
Lee Bradshaw <Lee.Brads...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
Yes - that comment has been mentioned before "Stylewriter" . As I said to "3iron", it is a work in progress and is one of my first websites. (Maybe it shows !?)
I'll be updating it over the weekend and will change a few things. The front page is a bit of "yellow brick road" as you put it. I'll change that !
As always, all comments are always gratefully received.
> In article <94s0nj$2e...@neptunium.btinternet.com>, > Lee.Brads...@btinternet.com says... > ____> All comments gratefully received, whether good or bad ! > ____> > First off, Lee, these kinds of splash pages do nothing for a > site except force users to click yet again to reach your > site. You may feel they're cool, but why put unnecessary > obstaceles in front of users YOU want to visit your site ?
> THEN we get to yet another welcome page........but we still > aren't IN the site ? come on Lee !
> GEEZ ! I'm really pissed no Lee. I haven't all night to > follow your yellow brick road. If you want to have fun, > fine. If you want to do business ? cut the shit and let > people into the site right off.
In article <94uv1a$3m...@uranium.btinternet.com>, Lee.Brads...@btinternet.com says... ____> As always, all comments are always gratefully received. ____> Don't mistake my bluntness for anthing more than working late at night :)
> Please could you do a site check on http://cheapgoodsonthe.net and let me > know what you think, please.
Get rid of TheCounter... it's an slow loading server, which "freeze" up Netscape for a while. I had to press the Esc key to stop it.
--
- Tony Sutton - http://tsutton.livejournal.com - My Live Journal - http://www.hyperboard.co.uk - Discuss on my message board ------------------------------------------------------------- Prevent computer viruses. Install Trojans! -------------------------------------------------------------
On Sat, 27 Jan 2001 11:56:55 -0000, "Alison Parsons"
<al.pars...@virgin.net> wrote: >Afraid I haven't time to pick at much more - but all in all looks a clean >site, good use of colour and links - good luck with it!
I found the colours to be very washed out, couldn't really see what was going on too well, and didn't see the motivation for the visitors, what added value do you give over a simple search engine?
on Fri, 26 Jan 2001 17:44:16 -0000, d...@nasuwt.net wrote...
> In uk.net.web.authoring, Eric Jarvis, mumbled something like > this...
> > copyright should be a single specific date except in exceptional > > circumstances
> So if the site was originally coded in 2000 and then updated > in 2001 should you cahnge the date to 2001 and not use 2000- > 2001.
> BTW I've read Richard's comment also so this question is > probably irrelevant in any case :o)
IANAL but
the version you coded in 2000 is copyright 2000 and the updated version is copyrighted 2001...at least that's the way it works with music or writing, and I haven't heard about the law being significantly different when it comes to new media
remember it's copyrighted whether or not you have a note to that effect on the site...but that isn't the important thing...the important question is would you be able to prosecute somebody for ripping it off
if there is a lawyer in the group they may correct me on this, but I have always had the impression that this is down to it being clear that the material or design are NOT in the public domain, and having a record of it being created at a particular time that is likely to stand up in a court
so the date on the copyright statement isn't really very important
-- eric "live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
It's fast, simple and useful. I've added it to my favourites. Your first page suddenly stops due to poor support from thecounter.com though. Check if your own isp has a cgi script for counters.
>> On this point...is it best to have 2000-2001 or just 2000 or >> does it really matter?
>IANAL but AFAIK you can't affect your rights with such a statement so, >in short, it doesn't matter (and it wouldn't matter if you didn't have >a copyright notice at all).
However, 2000-2001 shows to previous visitors that the site has been updated.
