Viewing Thread:
"Annuva sight wot I mayde"

I haven't even finished the last "sight wot I mayde", and I'm already putting together another one: [URL]http://www.pfi-holding.com/contract/[/URL]

I think this is actually quite a big company, so God knows how I ended up doing it. Mostly works, although you're probably used to seeing unfinished sites from me by now, so you know what to expect.

Firefox 1.0 on XP Pro.

Hmmm, never had that problem in Firefox, IE5.5, IE6, on XP or ME. What browser/OS you using?

Just noticed a slight problem with the Clients page. It is slightly wider than all the others, and the text kind of overlaps the two boxes.

I am slowly moving over to more CSS in my coding. The emphasis on this though was that it actually worked as a product catalogue, so I concentrated more on the PHP. To be honest, I didn't choose the colours, or design the logo - they were handed to me as part of the job. The scrolling text wasn't my idea either (I hate it too!!!), but it was a requirement.

Everything else is mine, and I quite like it, but I was worried it might have been a bit too 'off the wall'.

For once, sod the code, that a really nice rock solid design. OK, wouldn't take to long to tranlate to CSS, though semantically(sp?) it's fine though personally i'd ditch "td bgcolor=#FFFFFF" which is depricated in favour of CSS clases at least such as;

td.white {
background-color: #fff;
}

But I really do like that. Feels like "OldSkool" Habitat. Colors are great, text works well and the photography (based on what was there) suits it well if the style continues.


Was in a discussion last week about CSS vs Tables and it finally clicked with what it's all about. Tables are still ok for formatting a layout, especially if a requirement is for the layout to be retained in low end browsers, albeit unstyled. But use then in the correct way and in the barest of form. So this would equate to insuring it had a summary, id, th, tbody, thead structure for accessibility and mark up, the actual structure of the table should only consist of raw tags; table, tr, td, with no additional HTML-Stylee formatting.

Everything else like borders, padding, colors, fonts, alignment etc should all be controlled in the CSS.

This still allows things like ainceint browsers to use the site and screen readers to work and still meets with WAI as it's all about the code structure.

I still beleive that the way forward is still pure CSS layouts with all styling removed for the page code, but this is still a long way off depite FF reaching 5.7million download on Friday. Tables still have a use for layout, but with minimal use, no nesting and well structured mark up and layout, combined with well excecuted CSS, they still perfectly accessible, standards still stand and they still validate.

NB: Scrolling text is EVIL I tell thee...

Management accept no responsibility for the ammount of drivel here, but he's stoned, just worked 22 hours straight and has only slept for 4 hours in the last 36!! The joys of freelancing!;)

monkey_man wrote:
> ... HTML tables (boo, hiss, f**k you) ...

:^)

I was jus' sayin', is all ...

[URL]http://hopeconnections.co.uk/[/URL] for a lovely example of tables used for layout I did a while ago and am currently redesigning.

Heh, no fully CSS site yet - mixture of CSS to make the scrollers on the product bit and to format the text/forms/etc., HTML tables (boo, hiss, f**k you), and some nice PHP scripting, which is the real focus...although no-one picked up on that :(

I know I've still got a few web standards to catch up on. A nice design is nothing if it's not going to work in a few years, so I'll be focusing on my CSS now that I've overloaded my brain on pure PHP.

Hmm.

Looks nice, but ... minimal CSS and lots of tables used for layout.

Hmm.

Eh, Gamefreak, you couldn't just edit it out?

I'm dumb...

Coin wrote:
> However, I have to say, I have lost much respect for you, MM.

Er.

He hasn't used Frontpage, phi11ip was just making a casual joke you tard.