Critique of rehatch.net

Interested in layout advice mainly, but feel free to point out anything
that could be improved. Thanks

http://rehatch.net

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed stonead3 (AT) msu (DOT) edu writing in
news:1112398812.708330.114210 (AT) f14g2000cwb (DOT) googlegroups.com:

Interested in layout advice mainly, but feel free to point out anything
that could be improved. Thanks

http://rehatch.net

Looks good, the only thing I don't like is target="blank". The validator
doesn't like it either.

--
Adrienne Boswell
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share

stonead3 (AT) msu (DOT) edu wrote:

Interested in layout advice mainly, but feel free to point out
anything that could be improved. Thanks
http://rehatch.net

Personally I don't like the color scheme (too red :-)
Fixed width, font not scalable. Read something about 'fluid/flexible design'

--
Nico
http://www.nicoschuyt.nl

In message <Xns962BC6409251Earbpenyahoocom (AT) 207 (DOT) 115.63.158>, Adrienne
<arbpen2003 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> writes

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed stonead3 (AT) msu (DOT) edu writing in
news:1112398812.708330.114210 (AT) f14g2000cwb (DOT) googlegroups.com:

Interested in layout advice mainly, but feel free to point out anything
that could be improved. Thanks

http://rehatch.net



Looks good, the only thing I don't like is target="blank".

Except that it's being used when linking to an external site -- which is
a good thing.

(Although I would always put a notice on the page that links to external
sites open in a new window.)

The validator
doesn't like it either.

That's because the doctype is set to 'strict'.

As I see it (and I'm sure someone will correct me) the only two options
are:
(a) change the doctype to 'transitional', or
(b) remain 'strict', but use javascript to set target='blank' (probably
based on setting "rel='whatever'" in the link).

regards.



--
Jake

In message <1112398812.708330.114210 (AT) f14g2000cwb (DOT) googlegroups.com>,
stonead3 (AT) msu (DOT) edu writes

Interested in layout advice mainly, but feel free to point out anything
that could be improved. Thanks

http://rehatch.net

A few thoughts:

(a) The page is centred in IE, but left-justified in Opera and Netscape.

(b) Minor alignment differences between IE and Netscape/Opera.
Nothing that would worry me, however.

(c) The home page has some headers that are styled, but not marked up as
such e.g. CNN World News, Message Board

.... and I'm not quite sure what " <h1>&nbsp;</h1> " is all about

(d) You might want to mark up abbreviations/acronyms for those UAs that
can use them.

(e) 'Furher' should be marked up as 'lang=de' so that talking browsers
that can do so, will pronounce the word correctly.

(f) The CNN News section links might be better marked up as a list of
links, as an item indicator would make it more readable when the item
goes over one display line.

That's about it .......... looks an attractive site.

regards.
--
Jake

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed jake <jake (AT) gododdin (DOT) demon.co.uk>
writing in news:cO$RvlEeulTCFw4W (AT) gododdin (DOT) demon.co.uk:

In message <Xns962BC6409251Earbpenyahoocom (AT) 207 (DOT) 115.63.158>, Adrienne
arbpen2003 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> writes
Gazing into my crystal ball I observed stonead3 (AT) msu (DOT) edu writing in
news:1112398812.708330.114210 (AT) f14g2000cwb (DOT) googlegroups.com:

Interested in layout advice mainly, but feel free to point out anything
that could be improved. Thanks

http://rehatch.net



Looks good, the only thing I don't like is target="blank".

Except that it's being used when linking to an external site -- which is
a good thing.

Why is that a good thing?

1. It breaks the back button. I use mousegestures, and therefore rarely
look up to see if the back button is greyed out, so I'm gesturing
fruitlessly until I realize another window has been opened. It's easier
for me to gesture back than go up and close the window.

2. It uses up resources. For slow systems with little memory, that can be
a real PITA.

(Although I would always put a notice on the page that links to external
sites open in a new window.)

Now, that's a good thing. Or, even better, give the user a choice to open
links in a new window, ala Google or like I have done here:
<http://www.scriptassist.com/links.asp>.

The validator
doesn't like it either.

That's because the doctype is set to 'strict'.

As I see it (and I'm sure someone will correct me) the only two options
are:
(a) change the doctype to 'transitional', or
(b) remain 'strict', but use javascript to set target='blank' (probably
based on setting "rel='whatever'" in the link).

(c) Don't use it at all. See reason 1 above.



--
Adrienne Boswell
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share

Thanks everyone!

After reading your comments, I made the following changes:

1) Font-size is now scalable.
2) Added a bit more color to the front page (well... one more color).
3) Target="blank" removed.

About "<h1>&nbsp;<h1>", I use that to make the right column boxes even
with the left column box (the left column box has h1 text above it). If
there's a better way to do this, I'd like to change it.

Thanks again, guys!

In message <Xns962C23ECD8F59arbpenyahoocom (AT) 207 (DOT) 115.63.158>, Adrienne
<arbpen2003 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> writes

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed jake <jake (AT) gododdin (DOT) demon.co.uk
writing in news:cO$RvlEeulTCFw4W (AT) gododdin (DOT) demon.co.uk:

In message <Xns962BC6409251Earbpenyahoocom (AT) 207 (DOT) 115.63.158>, Adrienne
arbpen2003 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> writes
Gazing into my crystal ball I observed stonead3 (AT) msu (DOT) edu writing in
news:1112398812.708330.114210 (AT) f14g2000cwb (DOT) googlegroups.com:

Interested in layout advice mainly, but feel free to point out anything
that could be improved. Thanks

http://rehatch.net



Looks good, the only thing I don't like is target="blank".

Except that it's being used when linking to an external site -- which is
a good thing.

Why is that a good thing?

Ease of use (but YMMV).

1. It breaks the back button.

Not within the (current) browser window.

I use mousegestures, and therefore rarely
look up to see if the back button is greyed out, so I'm gesturing
fruitlessly until I realize another window has been opened. It's easier
for me to gesture back than go up and close the window.

2. It uses up resources. For slow systems with little memory, that can be
a real PITA.

I use a fairly old (sub-GHtz) model PC and I don't find it a problem. My
previous PC was a sub-sub-GHtz model and it wasn't any kind of problem
on that either.

Unless the user is on a slow 386 running Netscape 2, it should work OK
;-)

(Although I would always put a notice on the page that links to external
sites open in a new window.)

Now, that's a good thing. Or, even better, give the user a choice to open
links in a new window, ala Google or like I have done here:
http://www.scriptassist.com/links.asp>.

How many users know you can open a link in a new window (and how to do

it.)? Not many, in my experience.

The validator
doesn't like it either.

That's because the doctype is set to 'strict'.

As I see it (and I'm sure someone will correct me) the only two options
are:
(a) change the doctype to 'transitional', or
(b) remain 'strict', but use javascript to set target='blank' (probably
based on setting "rel='whatever'" in the link).

(c) Don't use it at all. See reason 1 above.

As someone on this(?) group (Nico?) mentioned not too long ago: if

opening a link in a new window was such a controversial issue, then
browser manufacturers would have provided an option allowing the user to
disable it. So far as I know, they don't.

I see it as just another decision for the designer to make, based on
his/her experiences.

regards.

--
Jake

jake wrote:

In message <Xns962C23ECD8F59arbpenyahoocom (AT) 207 (DOT) 115.63.158>, Adrienne
arbpen2003 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> writes

1. It breaks the back button.

Not within the (current) browser window.

target="_blank" is not the (current) browser window.

<snip>

How many users know you can open a link in a new window (and how to do
it.)? Not many, in my experience.

Everyone I have trained ... <g>

As someone on this(?) group (Nico?) mentioned not too long ago: if
opening a link in a new window was such a controversial issue, then
browser manufacturers would have provided an option allowing the user to
disable it. So far as I know, they don't.

Firefox: Tools > Options > Advanced
[X] Force links that open new windows to open in:
(·) the same window/tab as the link
( ) a new tab

I see it as just another decision for the designer to make, based on
his/her experiences.

He/she know his/her site will open a new window, and so won't get lost
like the average surfer.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

It looks pretty good to me overall, but I do have a comment regarding
your markup; You've got a minor case of div-itis.

1. <div class="rcbox1h"><strong>CNN World News</strong></div> should
just be an <h1> tag. The <div> tag doesn't have any semantic meaning,
so if you're using it to describe headings, for example, you might want
to change that.

2. You're faking a list in <div class="rcbox1">. Why not just use a
real one? Use css to style it how you like.

3. <span class="small"> can be replaced with the <small> tag.

4. <a class="hdr"... is unnecessary. Use child selectors in your css
like:

#header a{ color: #FFFFFF; border: 1px solid #FFFFFF; text-decoration:
none; }

I'd also ditch the &nbsp; on either side of your header links, and
replace them with something like {margin: 0px 5px 0px 5px;}

My general rule regarding divs is to use them to markup only "areas" of
your site. Really think about separating in your mind how the markup
should be "interpreted" vs. how it should be "shown". <div
class="rcbox1h"> means absolutely nothing, even though it's obvious
that it's supposed to be a header.

Nitpicks, I know.

--
Jeff Perrin
http://www.jeffperrin.com