Critique Request: Old GeoCities site

#1

This is a very old site that I've worked on for years:

http://www.geocities.com/conniesunday/

Your input appreciated.

#2

I'm surprised I haven't gotten any responses. Did I not phrase this
request properly or is there is some other difficult?

Thanks!!

lucy wrote:

Quote:

This is a very old site that I've worked on for years:

http://www.geocities.com/conniesunday/

Your input appreciated.

#3

lucy wrote:

Quote:

lucy wrote:
This is a very old site that I've worked on for years:

http://www.geocities.com/conniesunday/

Your input appreciated.

I'm surprised I haven't gotten any responses. Did I not phrase this
request properly or is there is some other difficult?

I'm not sure what you are looking for in the way of a critique. As you
stated, it is a very old site. So is the layout and coding style - circa
1995 style.

One item that jumps at me is the jumping links when hovered. Please
don't change the size of the text during a hover.

There is no consistency across pages. Each sub-page has a different
design and layout. Each page becomes a new learning experience for the
visitor, thus taking time away from reading content.

Lots of errors:
<http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.com %2Fconniesunday%2F>

Somehow, you are using a style sheet from Yahoo (jsoff.css), with my IP
address embedded in the link. That style sheet shows up with embedded
HTML, and fails in my browser (Firefox).

<link rel="stylesheet"
href="http://themis.geocities.yahoo.com/jsoff.css?thIP=24.169.145.89&thTs=1151593111">

Other than that, and short of starting over with modern coding
practices, I don't know what else to advise. Moving from Geocities would
be a good start?

--
-bts
-Warning: I brake for lawn deer

#4

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 05:13:08 -0700, lucy wrote:

Quote:

I'm surprised I haven't gotten any responses. Did I not phrase this
request properly or is there is some other difficult?

Thanks!!

Allright. It sucks.
--
JDS

#5

lucy wrote:

Quote:

This is a very old site that I've worked on for years:
http://www.geocities.com/conniesunday/
Your input appreciated.

- The background image repeats. It looks hokey.

- It is difficult to see where one link ends and another begins until I
mouse over. Then the text size changes and the links start jumping around.
- "What a press kit should include" links to "Violin/Viola FAQ". I finally
did find item 27 but never did find out what a press kit should include.
And what does a press kit have to do with violins? Or musicians?
- There is no clear indication of what the site is about. Connie? Violins?
Bow string instruments in general? Teaching? What information are the
images supposed to convey? (Is the little girl Connie? Is the grown woman
Connie?)

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

#6

I'm not using a style sheet of any kind (what's a style sheet?); it's
just plain 'ole html code I taught myself through trail and error, many
years ago.

What I find hard to understand is this: whenever I ask for input about
this page, I always get responses similar to the ones I've gotten here:
it sux, there are lots of errors, etc. However, it looks fine to me
on my lap and my PC, and I've looked at these pages from a half a dozen
university labs, computers from many dozens of temporary jobs I've held
here and there (a dozen cities, in law firms and all sorts of
businesses, including IBM), at internet cafes in dozens of locations,
at other people's homes -- and the pages always look fine.

So this mystifies me. Why does it look okay from all these locations,
and yet presumably have so many gaffs in coding?? Someone care to
explain this to me?

Thanks!

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

Quote:

lucy wrote:

lucy wrote:
This is a very old site that I've worked on for years:

http://www.geocities.com/conniesunday/

Your input appreciated.

I'm surprised I haven't gotten any responses. Did I not phrase this
request properly or is there is some other difficult?

I'm not sure what you are looking for in the way of a critique. As you
stated, it is a very old site. So is the layout and coding style - circa
1995 style.

One item that jumps at me is the jumping links when hovered. Please
don't change the size of the text during a hover.

There is no consistency across pages. Each sub-page has a different
design and layout. Each page becomes a new learning experience for the
visitor, thus taking time away from reading content.

Lots of errors:
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbos...onniesunday%2F

Somehow, you are using a style sheet from Yahoo (jsoff.css), with my IP
address embedded in the link. That style sheet shows up with embedded
HTML, and fails in my browser (Firefox).

link rel="stylesheet"
href="http://themis.geocities.yahoo.com/jsoff.css?thIP=24.169.145.89&thTs=1151593111"

Other than that, and short of starting over with modern coding
practices, I don't know what else to advise. Moving from Geocities would
be a good start?

--
-bts
-Warning: I brake for lawn deer

#7

renaissance (AT) australiamail (DOT) com wrote:
[Please don't top-post. Reply inline as I am doing.]

Quote:

I'm not using a style sheet of any kind (what's a style sheet?); it's
just plain 'ole html code I taught myself through trail and error,
many years ago.

Apparently then, your 'free' server is inserting the link to the style
sheet. It is in your code (view your own source) at the very top of the
page, above the following comment:



Don't you wish you could remove it?

Here is the CSS you are serving:
http://k75s.home.att.net/show/connie-css.txt

Note the line:
A:hover {color: #008080; font-family: Ariel; font-weight: bold}

Arial is spelled incorrectly, and that bold is what makes your links
jump.

Farther down, in the geocities CSS, it is mixed in with HTML code,
probably causing the entire file to be rejected by a competent browser.

Quote:

What I find hard to understand is this: whenever I ask for input
about this page, I always get responses similar to the ones I've
gotten here: it sux, there are lots of errors, etc. However, it

Well, this is an HTML critique newsgroup, frequented by professional
developers. If you only want feel-good critiques, ask your neighbors who
don't know anything about writing good web pages.

Quote:

looks fine to me on my lap and my PC, and I've looked at these pages
from a half a dozen university labs, computers from many dozens of
temporary jobs I've held here and there (a dozen cities, in law firms
and all sorts of businesses, including IBM), at internet cafes in
dozens of locations, at other people's homes -- and the pages always
look fine.

Sure, it looks fine (for some value of 'fine'). Personally, I think it
is an average quality amateur/beginner page/site. Doesn't approach
professional, though.

Do you like 'jumping text'?

Quote:

So this mystifies me. Why does it look okay from all these
locations, and yet presumably have so many gaffs in coding?? Someone
care to explain this to me?

The location from which you view the file has nothing to do with the
construction of the pages.

What about:

Quote:

There is no consistency across pages. Each sub-page has a different
design and layout. Each page becomes a new learning experience for the
visitor, thus taking time away from reading content.

Did you ever consider a 'theme' for the whole site?

--
-bts
-Warning: I brake for lawn deer

#8

On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:40:10 -0700, renaissance wrote:

Quote:

and the pages always look fine.

What do you mean by "looks fine"? That is a very subjective description.
My earlier reply "it sucks" was just my subjective response. And not
completely true: your site does not really suck. It's just that I find it
funny that people expect to get answers of any kind in Usenet. "No answer"
*is* your answer -- nobody has anything to say!

Do you want a more detailed analysis? Allright, here goes....

Geocities
I hate geocities-hosted pages for the crap they stick on the side. Very
annoying. But free, yes, I understand. But as this part is still just
subjective, please feel free to disregard. Still, web hosting, especially
for static HTML patges, can be had for quite cheap -- $4-$6 per month --
these days, and without the Yahoo banner stuff force-fed onto the page.

Organization
First off, I don't really know, straight off, what this page is trying to
accomplish. Violin teacher resources? Violin student resources?
General violin player/student/teacher/instrument resources? Hard to tell.

There is also too much stuff on the first page. That page is really,
really, REALLY long. It really should be broken into several pages. That
should be really easy, as it is already organized into sections! Take the
sections, "Essays" "Resources" "Discussion Lists" et.al. and create a
separate HTML page for each. Then put a navigation panel in somewhere
that links to each section. There is a reason why so many websites are
organized like that: it works.

I like the Site Map dropdown -- keep it.

Of course, it depends as well on how you use, and intend to use the site.
If it is really just a personal crib sheet listing all of your resources
in one place, then maybe it doesn't need to be reorginized. IT is
organized for you, you can use it, done. But I think other people might
have a harder time with it.

Technical Details and Coding
Now, the coding, just skimming the surface, is poor. Simple steps to
improve coding:

1) Code by hand
2) Validate using w3.org's validator.
3) Ditch Geocities as a host.

Coding by hand is not for everyone, but pre-fab HTML tools produce
notriously poor actual code. Some people don't care. "It works!" they
say. "Why bother making it perfect?" Well, perfect it does not have to
be, but good HTML coding practices help with a lot of things off the bat:
improved accessibility (to the disabled), improved browser compatibility,
improved scalability and layout-ability. If you must use a WYSIWYG tool,
at least don't use FrontPage. Ugh.

Validation of your HTML comes up with in the range of 150 errors per page.
Take a look at this for example:

http://validator.w3.org/check?verbos....html%3F200629

I can't delve further, there are too many errors and not enough time.

Layout, look, feel, and CSS
I really really really wish you would not change font size on rollovers.
REALLY! IT is the number one thing that I think is wrong with your site.
Next to the organization, that is. When *I* rollover, every link, and some
of the paragraphs, goes "bling!" and jumps a bit, sometimes causing the
whole page to jump, because you have set the rollowver style to be BOLD.
BAD IDEA!!!! Never ever ever change the font size or weight on rollover
('hover' in CSS parlance). If you don't see what I am talking about, then
get yourself a real browser (and OS) and look at your page. Firefox, I
mean.

Background image. Reasonably tastefully done: light in color, not overly
busy, muted, earth tone that does not interfere with the text. good! But
it repeats with a jarring horizontal line at its southern border. Might
want to consider tweaking that a bit -- maybe a bi-directional gradient
instead of the uni-directional one. ALSO, the background image is rather
big, both in pixel size and bandwidth size. Certainly with respect to the
total size of the page -- the bg image is half the bandwidth. Still,
total page bandwith is less than 50k. Not so bad.

That's about it. Overall, like I said, your site does not suck. It does
have some flaws, though. And it is definitely *not* "professional". But I
don't think you were striving for "professional" -- more like "advanced
hobbiest".

And finally, do you have a specific goal in minde in your request for
critique? I mean, I don't really understand where you are coming from with
your critique request.

later...

--
JDS | jeffrey (AT) go (DOT) away.com

Quote:

http://www.newtnotes.com
DJMBS | http://newtnotes.com/doctor-jeff-master-brainsurgeon/

#9

renaissance (AT) australiamail (DOT) com wrote:

Quote:

What I find hard to understand is this: whenever I ask for input about
this page, I always get responses similar to the ones I've gotten here:
it sux, there are lots of errors, etc.

So tell us what you want to hear. We may oblige.

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

#10

Quote:

And what does a press kit have to do with violins? Or musicians?

You're kidding, right?

Jim Moe wrote:

Quote:

lucy wrote:
This is a very old site that I've worked on for years:
http://www.geocities.com/conniesunday/
Your input appreciated.

- The background image repeats. It looks hokey.
- It is difficult to see where one link ends and another begins until I
mouse over. Then the text size changes and the links start jumping around.
- "What a press kit should include" links to "Violin/Viola FAQ". I finally
did find item 27 but never did find out what a press kit should include.
And what does a press kit have to do with violins? Or musicians?
- There is no clear indication of what the site is about. Connie? Violins?
Bow string instruments in general? Teaching? What information are the
images supposed to convey? (Is the little girl Connie? Is the grown woman
Connie?)

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)