please review this site

10 views
Skip to first unread message

Elle

unread,
Sep 29, 2004, 4:56:41 PM9/29/04
to
Hello to all...

I have tried my best to make my site accessible and inviting. Please
let me know if I have succeeded, and if I haven't, please offer
suggestions on how I can make it more accessible. I am especialy
looking for review of the following: colors, font sizes and styles,
ease of navigation, and content. Thanks a lot!

http://members.fortunecity.com/seaj11/index.html

Note: please follow the links to "Cinephile," "Bibliophile," and
"MACabre." ("MACabre" is at the bottom of the page.) These sites are
the main content sites and also have a different design.

Hywel

unread,
Sep 29, 2004, 5:53:16 PM9/29/04
to
In article <2fb17235.04092...@posting.google.com>, Elle
says...

> Hello to all...
>
> I have tried my best to make my site accessible and inviting. Please
> let me know if I have succeeded, and if I haven't, please offer
> suggestions on how I can make it more accessible. I am especialy
> looking for review of the following: colors, font sizes and styles,
> ease of navigation, and content. Thanks a lot!
>
> http://members.fortunecity.com/seaj11/index.html

Your use of the "Valid HTML4.01" icon is excellent considering that the
mark-up is rubbish and not even close to valid.

The site also appears to lack any design elements.

--
Hywel

http://sponsorhywel.org.uk/

David Dorward

unread,
Sep 29, 2004, 5:50:35 PM9/29/04
to
Elle wrote:
> I have tried my best to make my site accessible and inviting.

Well ... you have a number of syntax errors:

<http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//members.fortunecity.com/seaj11/index.html>

... despite your "Valid HTML 4" logo.

Sections of your page look like:

Notes

Cinephile Bibliophile

(where does one link end and the next begin?)

and

Free Guestbook from Bravenet.com Free Guestbook from Bravenet.com
Where in the world? Post to the guestmap and show your location.
Free Guestmap from Bravenet.com Free Guestmap from Bravenet.com


You abuse tables for layout:
http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?Tableless_layouts

And if you want to be accessible, you should probably read:
http://w3.org/TR/WCAG10/full-checklist.html

--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Home is where the ~/.bashrc is

SpaceGirl

unread,
Sep 29, 2004, 6:36:28 PM9/29/04
to
Elle wrote:

oh pul-eese! :D

--


x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

# lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com #
# remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

unread,
Sep 29, 2004, 7:29:37 PM9/29/04
to
Quoth the raven Elle:

> Hello to all...
>
> I have tried my best to make my site accessible and inviting.
> Please let me know if I have succeeded, and if I haven't, please

I'd say you haven't.

> offer suggestions on how I can make it more accessible. I am
> especialy looking for review of the following: colors, font sizes
> and styles, ease of navigation, and content. Thanks a lot!
>
> http://members.fortunecity.com/seaj11/index.html

This has to be one of the worst pages I've ever seen.
http://home.rochester.rr.com/bshagnasty/images/nophicent.jpg

Suggestions? I don't know where to begin.

> Note: please follow the links to "Cinephile," "Bibliophile," and
> "MACabre." ("MACabre" is at the bottom of the page.) These sites
> are the main content sites and also have a different design.

I can't even *find* any links on this page.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

The Doormouse

unread,
Sep 29, 2004, 11:18:27 PM9/29/04
to
night_...@hotmail.com (Elle) wrote:

> http://members.fortunecity.com/seaj11/index.html

Well, as other mentioned, your page does not validate - yet you lie and say
that it does, when a simple click of the button on your page tells us the
truth.

Maybe you should stop lying before I critique your page further.

Did I ever tell anyone how banner advertisements at the top of a page
always make me want to throw up a little? Well, they do.

The Doormouse

--
The Doormouse cannot be reached by e-mail without her permission.

Neal

unread,
Sep 30, 2004, 2:22:36 AM9/30/04
to


Oh, a "stars" background. How fucking novel.

I don't get to say this very often. And what's more, I'm drunk, so I can
enjoy it.

This page is a piece of shit.

If I sober up (and this page is no incentive), I'll elaborate. But this is
a sickeningly boring site. I don't know where to begin. Good day.

Elle

unread,
Oct 2, 2004, 12:14:34 PM10/2/04
to
The Doormouse <door...@att.net> wrote in message news:<Xns9573CE9DA941...@68.12.19.6>...

> night_...@hotmail.com (Elle) wrote:
>
> > http://members.fortunecity.com/seaj11/index.html
>
> Well, as other mentioned, your page does not validate - yet you lie and say
> that it does, when a simple click of the button on your page tells us the
> truth.
>
> Maybe you should stop lying before I critique your page further.

When I uploaded my page into the Validator, it validated. When I
checked it by URL, the only errors were those sections of the source
popped in there by FortuneCity. Therefore, I haven't made any errors,
and I'm not lying.


>
> Did I ever tell anyone how banner advertisements at the top of a page
> always make me want to throw up a little? Well, they do.

Well, guess what? I can't afford bannerless hosting, and that's where
banner ads usually appear for ad-supported websites. I don't know how
you surf the web; there are banner ads all over the place. Get real.
>
> The Doormouse

Elle

unread,
Oct 2, 2004, 12:19:53 PM10/2/04
to
Neal <nea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<opse4mny...@news.individual.net>...

> On 29 Sep 2004 13:56:41 -0700, Elle <night_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello to all...
> >
> > I have tried my best to make my site accessible and inviting. Please
> > let me know if I have succeeded, and if I haven't, please offer
> > suggestions on how I can make it more accessible. I am especialy
> > looking for review of the following: colors, font sizes and styles,
> > ease of navigation, and content. Thanks a lot!
> >
> > http://members.fortunecity.com/seaj11/index.html
> >
> > Note: please follow the links to "Cinephile," "Bibliophile," and
> > "MACabre." ("MACabre" is at the bottom of the page.) These sites are
> > the main content sites and also have a different design.
>
>
> Oh, a "stars" background. How fucking novel.
>
Get over it.

> I don't get to say this very often. And what's more, I'm drunk, so I can
> enjoy it.
>

Get a life.

> This page is a piece of shit.
>

So are you.

> If I sober up

Drink some coffee.

(and this page is no incentive), I'll elaborate. But this is
> a sickeningly boring site.

Well, you're not the kind of visitor I want, then.

I don't know where to begin.

Get a life.

Good day.

Yeah, whatever.

The Doormouse

unread,
Oct 2, 2004, 12:44:20 PM10/2/04
to
night_...@hotmail.com (Elle) wrote:

> When I uploaded my page into the Validator, it validated.

Oh, really?

Here's a direct link to the validator:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fmembers.fortunecity.com%
2Fseaj11%2Findex.html

The page does not validate now. It did not validate this past Thursday.

Why don't I believe you?

If your page validates today I will give you an apology.

> When I
> checked it by URL, the only errors were those sections of the source
> popped in there by FortuneCity. Therefore, I haven't made any errors,
> and I'm not lying.

The w3c button which you have on your site makes you a liar. The page is
not compliant as it is, but the button implies that the site is valid. I do
not care what code fortunecity added - you are responsible for the end
result.

Does the page validate? Yes, or no?

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fmembers.fortunecity.com%
2Fseaj11%2Findex.html

34 errors. Stop being a liar and take that button off your page. Do that
much, and I will apologize for being so mean to you.

> I can't afford bannerless hosting, and that's where
> banner ads usually appear for ad-supported websites. I don't know how
> you surf the web; there are banner ads all over the place. Get real.

Many companies offer web page hosting at $9.95 per month. Your frugality is
appalling.

"META Tags Created With: STW META Tag Builder"

Indeed. No coding necessary. ReadyBake code.

Deryck

unread,
Oct 2, 2004, 12:46:18 PM10/2/04
to

"Elle" <night_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2fb17235.04092...@posting.google.com...

> Hello to all...
>
> I have tried my best to make my site accessible and inviting. Please
> let me know if I have succeeded, and if I haven't, please offer
> suggestions on how I can make it more accessible. I am especialy
> looking for review of the following: colors, font sizes and styles,
> ease of navigation, and content. Thanks a lot!
>
The front page doesnt look great, in fact I would endorse the comments of
others. The other pages look better but most people will get turned away by
the first page and never see the rest of it.
If nothing else, the front page has an inconsistent style with the later
pages. Please, ditch the stars.

What do you mean by accessibility and what did you do to achieve it Elle?

As others have pointed out your site is no longer valid thanks to all that
feebie hosting crap and that same crap hasn't helped accessibility any.
However, if you want to make the site more accessible to people with poor
eysesight *you* need to change the way you set font sizes. Dont use pt (and
px maybe too?). Use em or %'s. This is due to a problem in Internet Explorer
but you have to work round it. Currently most of your text cant be resized
in IE.

> http://members.fortunecity.com/seaj11/index.html
>
> Note: please follow the links to "Cinephile," "Bibliophile," and
> "MACabre." ("MACabre" is at the bottom of the page.) These sites are
> the main content sites and also have a different design.

At the risk of repeating myself, why the different design? I couldnt find
the MACabre link BTW. In fact there is so much free crap on the front page
that your content gets lost amongst it. There is some very cheap hosting out
there that doesnt have all the ad crap.

Deryck


The Doormouse

unread,
Oct 2, 2004, 12:53:50 PM10/2/04
to
night_...@hotmail.com (Elle) wrote:

> I don't know where to begin.

Always start at the beggining, and when you come to the end, stop.
There are a handful of useful HTML codes. The rest is mostly crap.
Learn some basics, at the begginning, and start.
When you get bored, stop.

Neal

unread,
Oct 2, 2004, 2:38:28 PM10/2/04
to
On 2 Oct 2004 09:19:53 -0700, Elle <night_...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Neal <nea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<opse4mny...@news.individual.net>...

>> This page is a piece of shit.
>>
> So are you.

Hey, sorry you're pissed. But I'm being honest, and I hope you appreciate
why.

None of your friends will admit to you how trite, bland and totally
annoying your page is. You'll never see me in real life, I have no reason
to placate you, I can be dead honest. Isn't that why you came here?

If you want to be placated rather than be told honest opinions, don't you
think that should be stated up front?

Now, I will apologize for being overly curt. Here's my more detailed
advice.

1) Whatever authoring software you use, dump it. It's not very good, and
for what you are doing there's no need for it.

2) http://www.w3schools.com - learn HTML and CSS. In that order, or
simultaneously. Do a lot of small tests so you see how it works. Check out
http://www.htmldog.com too - although it espouses XHTML, which I disagree
with, and there are a few glaring errors, it's generally easy to
understand and well-maintained.

3) Begin from scratch on this site. Redesign it from the bottom up,
considering the following:

a. With raw HTML, and no CSS, images, scripting, etc. it should function
fine.
b. Add images, CSS, and script to enhance what works fine in the HTML,
not as the first-strike most-important consideration.
c. For under $100 US, you can get ad-free hosting. It's worth it, as the
free hosts add ads and garbage to your site which you cannot control. You
deserve better.
d. Please, please avoid the star background. I'm serious. It's a cliche
now. It serves as a signal that the author has no clue how good a website
can look like. It could be made to work, but you'd need to incorporate it
into a visually appealing design. Look at websites, see what looks good,
and go for it. Work with the knowledge and tools available and try for
something more appealing.

4) Bookmark http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/index/elements.html and
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/propidx.html - these are the official
references to the HTML elements and the CSS properties. A little dense at
first, but if you follow the advice in 2) above, it'll be no time before
you can understand much of it.

5) If you ever decide to use authoring software again (remember, you
dumped it?), consider: Buying a nice tool kit does not make you a
mechanic, buying a chainsaw does not make you a lumberjack. You need to
know how to fix the car too, you need to know how to safely fell a tree.
Likewise, buying some HTML tool doesn't mean you can make a good webpage.
The program is dumb, and you are not, I hope. You need to know how to do
it without the program in order for the program to be of any use to you.

David Dorward

unread,
Oct 2, 2004, 7:51:08 PM10/2/04
to
Elle wrote:

> When I uploaded my page into the Validator, it validated. When I
> checked it by URL, the only errors were those sections of the source
> popped in there by FortuneCity. Therefore, I haven't made any errors,
> and I'm not lying.

By using that logo (with that URI in the link), you are claiming that the
_page_ is valid, not that the _parts_ of the page that you wrote are.

rfq

unread,
Oct 6, 2004, 1:16:38 PM10/6/04
to
Neal <nea...@yahoo.com> wrote:


>You'll never see me in real life, I have no reason
> to placate you,

What difference does it really make if you ever see the person? Don't
placate, just show some common courtesy. But if you like to do your
drunken venting here I can't stop you. Just my 2 cents.


> Now, I will apologize for being overly curt. Here's my more detailed

> advice...

ZOINKS!! An actual sincere apology (only take out the "will") a real
rarity that I read one of those in the ng's. And some good advice
following it.

Very commendable reply...honestly.

RQ

Neal

unread,
Oct 6, 2004, 1:58:48 PM10/6/04
to
On 6 Oct 2004 10:16:38 -0700, rfq <r...@dorlan.on.ca> wrote:

> But if you like to do your
> drunken venting here I can't stop you.

Damn straight! (Well, this afternoon I am...)

> ZOINKS!! An actual sincere apology

Mind you, the page really did suck. I only apologized for being a boor
about it.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages