How a website *shouldn't* be written

http://www.brisbane-bound.com

Obviously using some sort of template. But it's absolute crap.

'Later
Peter

--
Peter aka Ulujain - Computing for Fun!
http://www.ulujain.org/

On Tue, 18 May 2004 02:31:44 GMT, Ulujain <peter (AT) REMOVEulujain (DOT) org> wrote:

http://www.brisbane-bound.com

Obviously using some sort of template. But it's absolute crap.

This site is truly horrid. Thanks for sharing.

Neal wrote:

On Tue, 18 May 2004 02:31:44 GMT, Ulujain <peter (AT) REMOVEulujain (DOT) org> wrote:

http://www.brisbane-bound.com

Obviously using some sort of template. But it's absolute crap.


This site is truly horrid. Thanks for sharing.

You are most welcome.

I was going to offer the guy my services to re-write the site. I have a
vested interest in the city he so badly draws and it grates upon me...

'Later
Peter

--
Peter aka Ulujain - Computing for Fun!
My email address doesn't work. See my website for contact details.
http://www.ulujain.org/

Ulujain <peter (AT) ulujain (DOT) org> wrote

Neal wrote:

On Tue, 18 May 2004 02:31:44 GMT, Ulujain <peter (AT) REMOVEulujain (DOT) org> wrote:

http://www.brisbane-bound.com

Obviously using some sort of template. But it's absolute crap.


This site is truly horrid. Thanks for sharing.

You are most welcome.

I was going to offer the guy my services to re-write the site.

If the site in your sig. is indicative of your work I wouldn't bother.
What they have now is far better. Did they ask you to critique it?

--
Hywel

Hywel Jenkins wrote:

Ulujain <peter (AT) ulujain (DOT) org> wrote


Neal wrote:


On Tue, 18 May 2004 02:31:44 GMT, Ulujain <peter (AT) REMOVEulujain (DOT) org> wrote:


http://www.brisbane-bound.com

Obviously using some sort of template. But it's absolute crap.


This site is truly horrid. Thanks for sharing.

You are most welcome.

I was going to offer the guy my services to re-write the site.


If the site in your sig. is indicative of your work I wouldn't bother.
What they have now is far better. Did they ask you to critique it?

LOL, OK. Define "far better". My site is hand-built to begin with, and
it's a *personal web site that has no real meaning*, as opposed to some
shite asp-based template with many links being 404's and a bunch of
incomplete sections and pages.

I'd hate to see what you can cobble up if you think that's better.

'Later
Peter








--
Peter aka Ulujain - Computing for Fun!
My email address doesn't work. See my website for contact details.
http://www.ulujain.org/

In article <qixqc.170$5W7.162 (AT) newssvr22 (DOT) news.prodigy.com>, Ulujain
says...

Hywel Jenkins wrote:

Ulujain <peter (AT) ulujain (DOT) org> wrote


Neal wrote:


On Tue, 18 May 2004 02:31:44 GMT, Ulujain <peter (AT) REMOVEulujain (DOT) org> wrote:


http://www.brisbane-bound.com

Obviously using some sort of template. But it's absolute crap.


This site is truly horrid. Thanks for sharing.

You are most welcome.

I was going to offer the guy my services to re-write the site.


If the site in your sig. is indicative of your work I wouldn't bother.
What they have now is far better. Did they ask you to critique it?


LOL, OK. Define "far better". My site is hand-built to begin with, and
it's a *personal web site that has no real meaning*,

It still looks boring, in my opinion, that is. Of course your site has
real meaning, otherwise why would you have spent the time on it?

as opposed to some
shite asp-based template with many links being 404's and a bunch of
incomplete sections and pages.

404s are not a sign of bad design.

I'd hate to see what you can cobble up if you think that's better.

The template site is visually far more impressive than yours. It may be
hand-coded but it has no element of design about it whatsoever.

--
Hywel I do not eat quiche
http://kibo.org.uk/
http://kibo.org.uk/mfaq.php

On Wed, 19 May 2004 06:59:33 +0100, Hywel <hyweljenkins (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote:

404s are not a sign of bad design.

They sure can be. The only excuse I can imagine for a 404 from a link on
your page is a server glitch.

Neal <neal413 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote

On Wed, 19 May 2004 06:59:33 +0100, Hywel <hyweljenkins (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote:

404s are not a sign of bad design.

They sure can be. The only excuse I can imagine for a 404 from a link on
your page is a server glitch.

Or the site owner fiddling with files on the server, incorrectly named
files, incorrectly naming links ...

--
Hywel

On 19 May 2004 06:44:00 -0700, Hywel Jenkins <hyweljenkins (AT) hotmail (DOT) com>
wrote:

Neal <neal413 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:<opr78gopf46v6656 (AT) news (DOT) individual.net>...
On Wed, 19 May 2004 06:59:33 +0100, Hywel <hyweljenkins (AT) hotmail (DOT) com
wrote:

404s are not a sign of bad design.

They sure can be. The only excuse I can imagine for a 404 from a link on
your page is a server glitch.

Or the site owner fiddling with files on the server, incorrectly named
files, incorrectly naming links ...

.... all of which are preventable in the long term. Perhaps you have a
different definition of "bad design", but I submit that if you have broken
links, your design is broken, and that is bad.

Even the smallest site is bound to eventually have a visitor happen along
when you're changing things around. Therefore, expect it, and always have
the supporting pages ready before the gateway is changed. Not so hard to
do.

In article <opr7849dyq6v6656 (AT) news (DOT) individual.net>, Neal says...

On 19 May 2004 06:44:00 -0700, Hywel Jenkins <hyweljenkins (AT) hotmail (DOT) com
wrote:

Neal <neal413 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:<opr78gopf46v6656 (AT) news (DOT) individual.net>...
On Wed, 19 May 2004 06:59:33 +0100, Hywel <hyweljenkins (AT) hotmail (DOT) com
wrote:

404s are not a sign of bad design.

They sure can be. The only excuse I can imagine for a 404 from a link on
your page is a server glitch.

Or the site owner fiddling with files on the server, incorrectly named
files, incorrectly naming links ...


... all of which are preventable in the long term. Perhaps you have a
different definition of "bad design", but I submit that if you have broken
links, your design is broken, and that is bad.

So, you develop a site for a client that has a link to aboutus.htm. The
client then deletes aboutus.htm from the server resulting in a 404 for
that file. Explain how that is an example of bad design.

--
Hywel I do not eat quiche
http://kibo.org.uk/
http://kibo.org.uk/mfaq.php