Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: New Site Design  (Read 19441 times)
VentdeSable
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 14, 2006, 03:21:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Just one more question :

What'is "RSS feed" ?
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4803



« Reply #21 on: November 14, 2006, 03:28:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Have a look here.
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #22 on: November 14, 2006, 03:39:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Ad hominem really is the popular way to do it these days, I see.

Quote
I'm a big fan of Web 2.0, usability, standards, the whole lot.  But c'mon, you're suggesting LL should be able to be read on a wireless device?
No.
Logged

Jan
VentdeSable
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


WWW
« Reply #23 on: November 14, 2006, 03:43:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Have a look here.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85236\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Got it thank you. Looks nice, when i become able to get it (subscription button gets me to a strange languages for the moment).

Thanks again.
Jérôme.
Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2226



WWW
« Reply #24 on: November 14, 2006, 03:46:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ad hominem really is the popular way to do it these days, I see.
No.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85241\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Lighten up Francis!  LOL
Logged

shed
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #25 on: November 14, 2006, 03:57:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Nice one Michael,

The new desing looks great and makes navigation a fair bit easier. No probs with the viewing size here...
Logged

Regards,

Andrew
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #26 on: November 14, 2006, 03:59:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Still too wide for 1024...
Logged

tgphoto
Guest
« Reply #27 on: November 14, 2006, 04:15:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Ad hominem really is the popular way to do it these days, I see.

You are obviously referring to your own original statement:

Quote
The gibes others make at 800x600 are tasteless and inconsiderate

If you light a match, expect a flame.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2006, 04:16:25 PM by tgphoto » Logged
Dale_Cotton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


WWW
« Reply #28 on: November 14, 2006, 04:55:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Pom is correct. Here is a screen shot from my PC set to 1600x1200:



The bottom scrollbar in the browser window indicates that IE is unable to proportionally reduce the width of the green and black columns to fit the current window width (a generous 1053 pixels). In order to view this page as intended the viewer is required to abandon browser side bars and/or maximize the browser window; that's not the case for any other professionally-done site I frequent.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2006, 04:59:28 PM by Dale Cotton » Logged
Mike Louw
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 137



WWW
« Reply #29 on: November 14, 2006, 05:03:01 PM »
ReplyReply

I love the new site! Perfect at 1920 X 1200 .....
Logged

jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #30 on: November 14, 2006, 05:07:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You are obviously referring to your own original statement:
If you light a match, expect a flame.
You are obviously unaware of the meaning of the phrase "ad hominem". It means "directed at the man". I was attacking your argument, not you.

You were attacking me, not my argument.

And no, I don't usually expect flames here, and since it appears that what I wrote only provokes you into that, I'll leave now.
Logged

Jan
maxgruzen
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


WWW
« Reply #31 on: November 14, 2006, 05:10:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hey -

I like the fonts and colors of the new CSS design on the homepage, but what is the intended viewing size? 1024x768 cuts off the site. It's fine on my main editing machine, but on the web browsing machine - which I run at a lower resolution, The site is too large...

Thanks,

Joe DeVico
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85151\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I certinly enjoyed the old site more then the new one.  Poor move Michael.
Logged
tgphoto
Guest
« Reply #32 on: November 14, 2006, 05:18:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I think your last statement is best summed up by the following phrase:

"English is a difficult language"

I understand the meaning of Ad Hominem quite well, and no, it does not mean to attack the argument as you suggest:

Ad Hominem

If you want to attack me, fine.  If you want to attack my argument, that's fine too.  But by calling the arguments/opinions of me and others on this discussion board "tasteless and inconsiderate" is clearly failure on your part to see a much larger picture.

I appreciate your comments as long as they are comments.  But an insulting is not the same as commenting, and will likely win you no fans here, sir.
Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2226



WWW
« Reply #33 on: November 14, 2006, 05:23:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Pom is correct. Here is a screen shot from my PC set to 1600x1200:

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85270\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


What version browser are you using?  Neither my FF1.x, 2.x nor IE 6.x or 7.x render that wide.  It all looks just fine (as of right now, maybe not when you took your snap).
Logged

tgphoto
Guest
« Reply #34 on: November 14, 2006, 05:35:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Looks like an IE window *squints*
Logged
dlashier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 518



WWW
« Reply #35 on: November 14, 2006, 05:40:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Yup, scrollbars here to, in both FF and IE, but only on the home page. But the thing is that there's nothing on the home page that requires forcing this width (yet anyway). In fact it's just wasting a wide gutter to the right of the green nav bar. Perhaps the a redesign of the home page is coming which will better utilize the space in which case I can live with the nuisance, but if not, why force it?

- DL
Logged

Dale_Cotton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


WWW
« Reply #36 on: November 14, 2006, 05:52:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
but only on the home page
Hi, Don: that's what I thought for a while too; but then I went exploring - as for example here and here.

Nevertheless, so many pages do work correctly, that I suspect there is a single code conflict that only crops up under certain circumstances.
Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1899



« Reply #37 on: November 14, 2006, 06:08:26 PM »
ReplyReply

We think its the red line spacer causing the prob - it'll be fixed in due course . . .
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
dlashier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 518



WWW
« Reply #38 on: November 14, 2006, 06:17:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
We think its the red line spacer causing the prob - it'll be fixed in due course . . .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85296\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yup, those lines are not <hr> but long lines of underscores. Was ok til the left navbar was added.

- DL
Logged

Ricko
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #39 on: November 14, 2006, 08:35:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Have a look here.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85236\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I noticed that the Wikipedia page you reference does fit correctly and has no scroll bar at the bottom of my IE broswer window.

Your home page does have a small horizontal scroll bar.  Maybe the width of the navigation cell is a good place to cut some pixels on either side.

I like the new look so far.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad