|
Firstly, yuck! Not a bad first effort, and I'm certainly no expert, but the current site needs some loving care badly. At the very least, white text on a black background is one of the worst choices you can make for a website. The little textbox is also a bad idea. Both look harsh, and though they work well enough for disseminating facts, they're hard on the eyes. Try for some softer tones, pastel backgrounds with san serif fonts work well. One of the more visually pleasing sites I've visited is www.8028finder.com[^]. The combination of soft visual effects and simple graphics make for a very comfortable site to visit and spend some time exploring.
On the bright side, it can be fixed. The banner is good - keep it. Then get a copy of Creative HTML Design.2[^], one of the best books I've seen on website design. It's a bit light on the details of HTML coding (though there's a fairly complete reference section in the appendices), but it does a great job of illustrating styles and techniques that are attractive. Even though you're not a web developer by profession, I think you'll really enjoy the book. The one thing definitely lacking in the book is any reference to CSS - Cascading Style Sheets. I have yet to find a decent book on the subject, but there's plenty of info on the web. Check out www.w3schools.com[^] for a tutorial. CSS allows you to separate visual effects from content, and gives you the ability to impose a consistent style on an entire site without complicating the individual pages.
Have fun! Website design is a nice, relaxing break from hardcore programming, and a great way to let your artistic side out to play.
"Another day done - All targets met; all systems fully operational; all customers satisfied; all staff keen and well motivated; all pigs fed and ready to fly" - Jennie A.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for taking the time to look at it, though you people could've been a little less harsh with your comments on it. This website was pretty much just an attempt at using some HTML programming I learned in school. It was my first attempt and I like to code by hand instead of using WYSIWYG type design apps.
It wasn't meant to be the prettiest thing at first, just needed to get it up at first. Then I got stuck with school/work/everything else so I couldn't devote any time to researching better design and working on it at all.
Again, thanks for the advice, and I'll look into this HTML Design book. And after this week all should be good for a few weeks so I can devote time to it.
Who am I?
Currently: A Programming Student trying to survive school with plan to go on to Univeristy of Advancing Technology to study game design.
Main career interest include: Multimedia and game programming.
Working on an outside project: A game for the GamePark32 (GP32) portable gaming console.
My website: www.GP32US.com
|
|
|
|
|
nssone wrote:
though you people could've been a little less harsh with your comments on it.
Sorry - it's early and I haven't had my first pot of coffee yet. If it's any consolation, my first was far worse, and I'm not too sure I've gotten much better. Like you, it's a sideline for me - not something I intend to pursue as a career. And it's damned hard to force myself to get better at it when there are so many other distractions demanding my time.
Do take a look at the book; it's quite good, though at the time I was looking for an HTML primer and it isn't a great tool for that. The W3 Schools link is one you'll want to bookmark, though. It's free and very thorough. Most of all, have fun with it.
"Another day done - All targets met; all systems fully operational; all customers satisfied; all staff keen and well motivated; all pigs fed and ready to fly" - Jennie A.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, well, I'm not being a crybaby and you didn't really hurt my feelings, it just felt like that comment was a little mean. It's good to know that you too had a hard time at web design at first. And I will keep in mind those websites and that book.
Who am I?
Currently: A Programming Student trying to survive school with plan to go on to Univeristy of Advancing Technology to study game design.
Main career interest include: Multimedia and game programming.
Working on an outside project: A game for the GamePark32 (GP32) portable gaming console.
My website: www.GP32US.com
|
|
|
|
|
When you ask people to comment on aesthetics, don't be surprised when they are honest. I don't think it was anyone's intetion to hurt your feelings, but if people (what we call back home) "blow sunshine" ( - which means giving compliments in order to not make the person feel bad), it doesn't benefit anyone. It makes the complimentor a liar and gives the person who asked a false sense of their skill level.
Truthfully, the site looks like it was created circa 1995 when the web was still fresh and the "blink" tag was a standard on all pages . My suggestion is that if you want to get into graphic design, go for it--pursue that with tenacity!! However, if you are wanting to be a programmer (as your sig mentions), you will have to choose. You would not have time to get really great at both--especially once you're out of school.
Keep in mind--most game manufacturers have programmers *AND* artists--rarely will you find someone who is great at both because they both require skill, dedication, and (eventual) mastery (you know what they say about the jack of all trades--he's a master of none). A word to the wise--decide what you like to do more and pursue that with a vengence.
As a guy who has done a lot of web programming (and design for that matter), I can honestly say that I am a skilled programmer and a terrible graphic artist. I have come to that conclusion over time and I'm ok with that. I now use templates or custom designs created by professional designers when I get a new web development gig. I use Template Monster for the most part, but sometimes I just outsource the design work to an artist and do all the programming myself. It works very well that way.
Best regards and keep working on your site. Don't give up because a couple of guys think it needs work. Adversity is your friend. 
-Matt
------------------------------------------
The 3 great virtues of a programmer:
Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris.
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a reason I can't get JPEGS to load on an HTML page with a bit depth of 8? Is there a workaround for this?
|
|
|
|
|
does anyone know how to use the "setAttribute" method in javascript to add an event to an element?
for some reason it seems that it's actually adding the event, however the event never get's fired.
here is a copy of the code I'm using:
<br />
<script><br />
var newField = document.createElement("INPUT");<br />
newField.type = 'file';<br />
newField.id = 1;<br />
newField.setAttribute("onChange","alert('hi')");<br />
<br />
document.getElementById(fields-1).insertAdjacentElement("afterEnd",newField)<br />
</script><br />
when I use the "view partial source" add-in for "ie" it shows that the element was added with the attribute, however, when I change the content of the field the event does not get fired. - as opposed to when I set that same attribute in plain HTML... - like so <input type="file" onchange="alert('hi');" id="1">
all help is appreciated.
thanks in advance,
- webProgrammer
|
|
|
|
|
"attribute" != "event"
If you want to add an event handler, you have to use either the inline HTML attribute that matches up to the name (this is not a normal attribute), or use either one of the scripting ways below:
myElem.oneventname = eventhandler;
myElem.attachEvent("oneventname", eventhandler);Notice the use of quotes above. Where I use eventhandler you just use the function name without quotes. This results in a function pointer. You should take a look at the "Web Development"->"HTML and Dynamic HTML" section of the MSDN Library[^] for further details.
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.21
GCS/G/MU d- s: a- C++++ UL@ P++(+++) L+(--) E--- W+++ N++ o+ K? w++++ O- M(+) V? PS-- PE Y++ PGP++ t++@ 5 X+++ R+@ tv+ b(-)>b++ DI++++ D+ G e++>+++ h---* r+++ y+++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
|
|
|
I tried this before it did not work, - myElem.oneventname had the same results as myElem.setAttribute (obviously replaced by the element name and event type)
however, in regard to "attachEvent" - this did not even make it to where the other 2 did. - meaning, if I looked at the code (in view partial source) with the other 2 I would actually see that the event handler was in place, however not when I used the "attachEvent" function.
- I will try again though
although I still believe this is an issue thanks alot for your help, I really appreciate it.
webProgrammer
|
|
|
|
|
You can't add "alert('hi')" - it MUST be a function name (without quotes). Underneath it all, this all comes down to COM implementations. attachEvent takes a string that identifies the event name and a VARIANT that is a function pointer - NOT a string. There is no magic involved here and you must follow symantecs. Instead, try somthing like this:
<script language="javascript">
function sayHi()
{
alert("Hi!");
}
myElem.onclick = sayHi;
myElem.attachEvent("onclick", sayHi);
</script>When you use setAttribute, you might thing that this would work from an HTML standpoint, but this isn't manipulating the HTML - it's creating an HTML element in the HTML Document Object Model (DOM) that would've otherwise been read by MSHTML from the HTML document. Instead, you must attach the event handler correctly. Again, the event is not an attribute though it can be represented by an attribute. MSHTML will know better and will hookup a function (or create on in memory that wraps the code you put in the HTML attribute) when it reads the HTML attributes on the element.
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.21
GCS/G/MU d- s: a- C++++ UL@ P++(+++) L+(--) E--- W+++ N++ o+ K? w++++ O- M(+) V? PS-- PE Y++ PGP++ t++@ 5 X+++ R+@ tv+ b(-)>b++ DI++++ D+ G e++>+++ h---* r+++ y+++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
|
|
|
thanks alot, did not have a chance to test yet, but makes sense.
is there a way I can also pass a parameter with the function? (not in quotes)
I do have a way around it if not, but it's easier if I can.
thanks,
webProgrammer
|
|
|
|
|
No you can't, since it's a function pointer. The caller is responsible for passing any arguments to your functions, so the function signature should match what the event has documented.
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.21
GCS/G/MU d- s: a- C++++ UL@ P++(+++) L+(--) E--- W+++ N++ o+ K? w++++ O- M(+) V? PS-- PE Y++ PGP++ t++@ 5 X+++ R+@ tv+ b(-)>b++ DI++++ D+ G e++>+++ h---* r+++ y+++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, you can if you use an intermediate function:
myElement.attachEvent("onclick", function(eventData)
{
if (!eventData) eventData = window.event;
element_OnClick(myElement, eventData);
});
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Hi
I want to use the css style properties in my one of my columns of a table, but can't get the code working.
I want to use the code
body
{
background-image:
url("/images/smiley.gif");
background-repeat:
no-repeat;
background-attachment:
fixed
}
in a table, like:
body
{
background-image:
url("/images/smiley.gif");
background-repeat:
no-repeat;
background-attachment:
fixed
}
|
appreciate any help
tx
|
|
|
|
|
try putting a semi-colon after "fixed"
i had trouble with this before
"there is no spoon"
biz stuff about me
|
|
|
|
|
l a u r e n wrote:
try putting a semi-colon after "fixed"
I get to display the image, but because of the body {} command it's the background for the whole page. I want to know how to display this image one in the table column!
|
|
|
|
|
then set a style for the table column:
.tcp {bgpic: blah blah};
///////
etc
"there is no spoon"
biz stuff about me
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Everyone,
I wanted to know your view point on the current discussions we are having.
We want to launch a web site for our company. What should be the design parameters of it?
Do u think that in this present times of flashy fashion, some catchy flash orieted site is a dire requirement or the good old lots-of-information kinda sites are still good?
Thanks in advance....
merry christmas
"The chance of the bread falling with the buttered side down is directly proportional to the cost of the carpet." Muphy's Law
|
|
|
|
|
vivek_mastishk wrote:
merry christmas
Same to u too.
vivek_mastishk wrote:
kinda sites are still good
It all depends on the kind of website you are looking for. If yours is a 'content based' site then it wont be of necessary to go for a flashy site.
If yours is a 'revenue model' site, you should go for something to increase visitors for the site.
So, make a decession on what you are going to put on the site!!
I was born intelligent
Education ruined me!.
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO it goes like this...
Everything thats know to catch someones attention should be used.
If you offer only copious amounts of content and a not so plesant interface or nice flash intro or banners or whatever...SOMEONE ELSE WILL!!!
I used to think that windows apps should ONLY be fully functional and never bothered with interface design or cool niceties...
Ever played with Window washer and then History Kill?
Windows washer has it all...powerful, easy to use, looks super cool...it's simply the stuff good apps are made of...
Just my opinion 
The word of the day is legs, let's go back to my house and spread the word 
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on your audience, your image, and the purpose of site.
Personally, I click 'Skip Intro' whenever possible on any site that has a flash intro. I think they are useless, and come between me and whatever it is I'm trying to do. If you must have one, keep it short (3-5 sec.).
The organization of your site is more important than how cool it looks, IMO. Having said that, a graphically pleasing site it always a good idea, as long as you don't sacrifice too much in terms of usability.
So, once you have the organization(conetent and navigation) of your site laid out, then you can decide on how you want it to look. What image do you want to portray? This may cause a need for fancier graphics or even some flash, I suppose. The point is there is a balance that will work for your case.
"Things are not what they seem. Nor are they any different." BW
CP Member Homepages
|
|
|
|
|
I totally agree to your opinion...
This is the most profesional way to go...
There are good and bad flashy web sites and there are good and bad content based web sites... There are also good and bad websites that are a bit of both...
You need to find the balance depending on what your target group is and what the image of your comapny is. I wouldnt take seriously a financial companys web site if it was too flashy and it would be boring to have content based and serious web site for a company that make computer games...
theJazzyBrain
Wise is he who asks good questions, not he who gives good answers
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Just go to this site http://www.auh.eud. At the front page there is a 'FLASH' animation. Can anyone help me to know what font is that anyway please????!!!!
I was born intelligent
Education ruined me!.
|
|
|
|
|
SPS wrote:
http://www.auh.eud
There is no site there at the moment, I just get IE's page not found page - that's in Verdana 
If you meant auh.edu, there is a "american western" text style flash animation, but it may not be a font, just some bitmaps - I don't recognise it. Why not ask their web master?
--
Ian Darling
"The moral of the story is that with a contrived example, you can prove anything." - Joel Spolsky
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Darling wrote:
There is no site there at the moment, I just get IE's page not found page - that's in Verdana
If you meant auh.edu, there is a "american western" text style flash animation, but it may not be a font, just some bitmaps
Actually I was asking about the font in the 'flash' animation. Anyway, I was able to 'find' the font. Thanks to 'fonts.com'.
I was born intelligent
Education ruined me!.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
