The two friends I've showed didn't particularly like it. What do you think? It's completely different from the traditional Slimeland colors.
I'm worried especially that it's too dark. That background color should be red - tell me if it looks black to you; I designed it on my laptop LCD screen and I may have to do some gamma correction.
I think the Doc has gotten into each of our psyches and whispered the colors yellow and orange. I personally love the combo and this is quite a departure from the cyan to be sure.
The text links on the upper right seem a bit jaggie on my screen. I'm not sure what can be done about that since they are text but it does make them a bit harder to read. Perhaps a sans serif font would help?
Hey, my referrer logs show that 23 people followed the links, and yet only two replied! Rrrrr!
I'm glad you like it, DL. Actually, it was heavily inspired by your site - the ideas for the horizontal bands with a repeating image on top, and a separate image in the top left which matches seamlessly, were taken from your site.
I'll change the link color; that was one of the things I changed in my second post to this thread, and yeah, it's a little too bright.
Bugs, I'm not sure why the text does that in the upper right. It's ascii text, so it's rendered by your OS, and I think Windows does that with large text for some reason. I'm not sure why. Perhaps the AA algorithm is flawed. I'll look into other fonts for it - any recommendations?
Not to sound like some SL registrant, but... it hurts my eyes. I quite enjoy the color scheme of the Asylum but I think you?ve just taken it a little too far. All the colors you?ve chosen are so similar that it?s like trying to read fire.
And the contrast between the colors also makes it a little hard to decipher what?s what. Making the link color nearly the same color as the headers, makes me move to a header just to see if it might be a link. Not only that but some of the headers actually are links but don?t adhere to the color scheme you?ve selected.
I like the structure, I think it?s very clean and adaptable. I just don?t think the color scheme fits with what you?re trying to accomplish.
Also, you?re apostrophes are the wrong apostrophes for the character encoding that you?ve listed. I?m not sure if it?s just something on my end or what, but they all look like this ?
[edit]
--------------------^
See, that's an apostrophe for the "iso-8859-1" characterset. Which is why it's look like an apostrophe right now. The apostrophe for unicode is something else; I think you can get one from Notepad.
[/edit]
[This message has been edited by Rooster (edited 02-16-2003).]
Don't worry about the apostrophes, I'm aware of that issue. It won't happen in the real thing.
The header-links not being the normal link color was done on purpose. Headers being confusable with links was not. I'll see what i can do with that.
I do know what you mean with it being hard on the eyes. I definitely had some trouble picking out appropriate text colors. I'll keep working with it, but I'm not sure how much better I'll be able to get it.
Oh, by the way, the colors weren't consciously based off of the asylum; Rather, they were slightly inspired by Zeldman's orange alternate style sheet.
hmm... I like the placement of yer links better on yer first page.
At first glance the links on your test page confuse my brain... I am used to them being stacked ontop of each other in a vertical fashion.
Second glance and i realized they were actually organized... just takes some time.
the color kinda blew me away. It does not *feel* like a slime page, but there is a slimie on the page. Eh, confusion. Are the slimies revolting? I do like the colors its just.... weird. Like, if your slimies got nose rings and tattoos... yeah. revenge of the Adolescent slimies!
heh, i love the smiling doobie at the bottom left!
quote:Actually, it was heavily inspired by your site
cool =)
I like the updated colors - all around a bit milder.
As far as the apostrophes are concerned - can someone point me to a reference of some sort for quotation marks/apostrophe's and the like...as in, which should be used where, what the code for the characters are, etc?
Slime: Yes, it's quite a change. I can see the Zeldman inspiration. And no, it doesn't hurt my eyes.
DL: Well, there should be a bunch of resources, but I can't seem to find any that list the codes for apostrophes, etc. Fortunately, I keep a list of the typographical marks I use often:
(en dash) ? [#8211]
(em dash) ? [#8212]
(left single quote) ? [#8216]
(right single quote) ? [#8217]
(left double quote) ? [#8220]
(right double quote) ? [#8221]
I could have sworn I had a resource lying around somewhere that listed everything...
[Edit: And here it is. From the W3C, of course. The codes I listed here can be found at the very bottom under "General Punctuation." I imagine that most of the codes you would want to use could be found there. Each of those numbers also have text equivalents, which I suppose are easier to remember, but I read somewhere (possibly this page I linked to... can't remember) that the numbers are better supported. Who knows...]
[This message has been edited by Suho1004 (edited 02-17-2003).]
The reason the apostrophes are messing up on this page, is because I'm using XSLT to generate my content from XML files. The XSLT contains the character entities (and converts normal quotes into them during transformation), and when it outputs the HTML file, it doesn't actually output character entities; it seems to output the characters.
While I don't like that, I can't find an option to change it, and the final page still validates, so I figure it doesn't really matter. However, when I view the source in notepad, and then save it to disk, it saves these characters differently, somehow. So they don't show up right on this version. *shrug* doesn't matter for test pages.
Slime: Yep, that's where I first saw the codes, but after reading that article I decided to do some hunting around and find the rest of them.
As for the character entities, your encoding is currently UTF-8 (Unicode) and the special characters look like boxes. If I change the encoding to ISO-8859-1, though, the characters come out fine. I'm not sure why you are using UTF-8, but maybe there's something going on here that I'm not aware of (pretty likely, actually).
DL: Yes, things can be very hard to find there. That's why I had a mini panic attack when I couldn't find that bookmark...
I like it Slime, but somehow I've sort of seen the cyan as a trademark color for you
I only have one gripe, and it's been mentioned before, the presentation of the fonts in the header and the links, they don't render well.
Personally I love Georigia but I've noticed that it's really sensitive to jaggies in small sizes.
Ok, maybe two gripes The page is a bit long with all that content, to make it a bit easier to navigate, place a "top" link at each anchor-section.
Other, solid work (big surprise, not...) decent contrast even if it's dark.
/Dan
{cell 260}
-{ a vibration is a movement that doesn't know which way to go }-
The fonts are better, a bit boring, but better...
Im my setup (w2k and IE6.02) your "'" is replaced with "?", at least on this page: http://www.slimeland.com/style/test.html
quote:That?s a while off, however. All I?ve written is some
That is badly in need of a fix, otherwise it looks fine to me.
/Dan
{cell 260}
-{ a vibration is a movement that doesn't know which way to go }-
The full horizontal scrollbar is some sort of glitch that IE is introducing with elements being set to 100%. It appears and disappears as you resize. I'm not sure there's anything I can do about it without compromising the design.
DmS: that was already discussed on this page =)
Personally, I liked the headers the way they were. On my home computer, there were no jaggies with either font.
Here at work, both fonts get jaggies
As far as the scrollbar - yes, it's an IE glitch. I haven't found a good way around it so far, when you need the 100% width. No scrollbar in NN or Mozilla.
posted 02-15-2003 21:25
