OK, I am on the verge of collapsing here, but I swore to myself that it would be done today--and it is. I'm sure I screwed up something along the way, but it should be more or less together. Here we go...
Detailed information (what I'm looking for in a review, etc.) is available on the front page--if you're serious about reviewing this site, you should probably read it all.
I'll be going to bed now (unless I fall asleep on the way), so I won't be able to get around to this until tomorrow morning. If there's a severe problem with the site just post a message and I'll get to it sometime tomorrow. Cheers to everyone who has helped me on this so far, especially those I spoke with on Q (Drac, I decided to run with your idea...). Just bear with me a little longer and we'll have this show on the road.
[Edit: Link updated...]
[This message has been edited by Suho1004 (edited 03-19-2003).]
From: Rochester, New York, USA Insane since: May 2000
posted 02-24-2003 15:53
I like the look.
There is an issue with the page loading. My cpu usaged spikes whenever I scroll up or down your content. I am not sure why this is, but it is really awful lag.
I don't care too much for the darker (seemingly default) stylesheet compared to the lighter, but thats just personal taste. The content is fantastic. I just finished reading your background story and I came very close to attending Binghamton. I'm looking forward to you finishing both your fiction and poetry sections.
Very nice Suho - I love what you've done with the logo =)
I am at work, where I am stuck with either IE4, NN4, or a copy of Mozilla that I managed to steal from one of the IT guys.
So of course, I'm using the Mozilla, and I have no problem with a lag as Warmage does, but I'm also on a T1, so who knows...
The only concern I have is the menu - at 800x600 the archives link is pushed onto a new line, and really breaks up the flow a little. I'd like to see that somehow stay on a single line.
Don't care for the 2nd color scheme {{edit for clarification: I don't like the light color scheme. the dark one works far better}}, but I suppose that's the point of multiple color schemes...let the user have their preference.
Can't think of anything to say that wasn't covered last time around - and all of my concerns from then have been dealt with.
Looking good =)
[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 02-24-2003).]
Ay, looks great. Clean, simple and fast, just the way I like em.
I'm also a fan of the lighter scheme moreso than the darker one but hey, each to their own.
As for the lag?... I'd call it a "performance hit" that WarMage is seeing, that'd be from the fixed position backgroundon the body element. They have a tendancy to square up against slower computers in a really ugly way and bog them down in trems of performance. The only way around it would be to use a <div> with an overflow:auto setting for your content.
You could still get the same nifty overlap thing happening in lower resolutions this way without the performance hit but I can't vouch that'll work for every browser (Opera 5 and 6 will break, just to name a few). Hint: you'll also need to set body {} and htm {} CSS rules with 100% height and width to get things working properly. <- Had me stumped on several similar problems for ages so I thought it worth sharing. If you want to give it a go and your having issues then just Q me on it. Then again, if your not too worried about people with slow PC's using Mozilla (and let's face it, mozilla ain't too speedy at the best of times.) then you could just leave it how it is. After all, if it ain't broke (for the most part) don't fix it.
.
All in all, it's a wondefull site and you've got some killer content to flesh it out with. I'll visit often.
ps. Very nice work on setting cookies for the style switcher.
i'll second comments on the lighter colour scheme, apart from that red link colour... i think most of the other design aspects were covered in the last thread, so i'll just say that i like the little graphic, a nice looker, unobtrusive - fits right in. on ie6 win98 p500 i do get some jelly like wobbling when i scroll, but i don't think it's any major worry, it's just not as smooth as a regular page with no fixed elements. one other thing, you asked for advice about contact information, well i'd strongly recommend using a form. either use something like the script they let you use on scriptbreaker.com, which i use on www.quisja.tk, very easy, or what i would do if my hosts hadn't disabled it in php, just write a quick php email script, examples of which are everywhere. hope that helps a bit. i'm off now... [edit] spent a while reading too - yep very good stuff there as well.[/edit]
[This message has been edited by quisja (edited 02-25-2003).]
[This message has been edited by quisja (edited 02-25-2003).]
WarMage: I may look into trying to fix that (per Drac's instructions), but it's not going to be too high on my priority list (especially since it looks like "fixing" it might cause more problems than it solves). Sorry...
Jestah: There will always be a place in my heart for Bing.
DL: Ah, the menu. Yes, I have struggled with this part. I took out the pipes between menu items, since they looked ugly when the line broke. I suppose I could try to reduce the spacing between items, but the problem is that just about every unit of measurement is relative. So even if I do reduce the spacing so that it doesn't wrap at a smaller font size at 800x600, it may not work for everyone. That being said, I'll give it a shot and see if I can't get it to stay on one line for the majority of viewers.
Drac: If I do end up trying a fix like that, I will probably get in touch with you, but as I said above it's not looking likely at the moment. Also, for clarification: setting overflow:auto on my content div would give me an internal scrollbar, no? Or is that only if I specify a height for the div? Right now there is no height specified, so what would the overflow:auto do? Hmm... I think I'll have to go try that out.
quisja: Jelly wobbling, eh? I imagine that might get annoying, even if it isn't a major worry. I suppose I'll have to look into a color scheme without a fixed background (I seem to be on a fixed background kick these days). Thanks for the advice on the contact info--given my current fascination with PHP, that sounds like a good route to take.
I'm wondering if anyone else has tried out the style switching with Opera. If it doesn't work I'm thinking of going PHP on that too, rather than trying to fiddle with the JavaScript. We'll have to see how it goes. That and the hover problems are my main concern at this point (until someone points out a bigger problem).
The high processor usage when scrolling is due to the usage of a fixed background. You might try making it so that the content's div can never overlap the background image. Also, I'm not sure how large that alternating transparent pixel graphic is, but if it's only 2x2 or so, make it a lot bigger so that repeating it isn't a difficult task for the browser.
The only thing I have a problem with is the purple background of hovered links. Yuck. =)
From: under the Milky Way tonight Insane since: Feb 2003
posted 02-27-2003 16:52
Are you settled on not using the semi-transparent layer because of images in your image gallery? I was sad when I revisite your site to see that it's opaque now. I understand if you can't get the two concepts to work together, but I really liked the effect over a fixed background.
[Edit: Nethermind: Yup, that's pretty much the reason. I was kind of sad too, but there's not much I can do about it at the moment. If opacity support improves in the future I may give it another shot.]
hey it was doin that, three times, then the second time i had tried to simply type in the site, the style sheet stuck and everything was smooth... anywho i do like the second choice from the right as far as color schemes go. Ur a good rambler. i tend to bore and confuse.. i just dont put enuff time into it all i suppose. That soccer crowd looked crazy huge. anywho nothing much to say, just wanted to metnon that it did eventually work right.
Suho, I suspect the style sheet problems are due to Internet Explorer treating cookies differently when the document is accessed in different ways. I remember some people having that bug with this very forum.
We talked about this earlier, and I really have no idea what the problem is (the script looks sound). However, I invite you to look at my style switcher, which I believe works (though I may be wrong). It's based off of the ALA style switcher, and uses the same principles, but goes about it somewhat differently. The script is at http://www.slimeland.com/style/styleswitcher.js , and it's accessed through my front page. You're welcome to copy it if you can't figure out the problem. In the mean time, I recommend you comment out the onload function from your script so that when people view your page, they at least get the default style sheet.
That aside, I like the design, and I think the little "People who write blogs are losers!" inset is clever - I've never seen that sort of thing in a blog. I like the font choices too.
Thanks for the input, guys. The style sheet switching has been giving me extreme agita--every time I think I get it working right, it goes and breaks again.
Slime: I will definitely be taking a look at your style switching code. I love ALA, but I have had nothing but problems with this switcher. Of course, I don't think it is their fault--it [i]should[/b] work, and I think it probably does have something to do with the way IE handles cookies when the page is accessed from different locations (for example, I just typed in the address without the "www" and the style didn't show...). But the fact of the matter is that it doesn't work--at least not very well. (I commented out the onload function, as you recommended, since I probably won't get around to looking at your code until this evening or tomorrow.)
DL: Not sure how well I managed to hide it, but I too have a distinct distaste for "blogs," and for the same reason. And that is precisely why mine is a "journal" and not a "blog"--as you noticed. The distinction seems to escape some people, though, and I have to chuckle when people say things like "don't listen to your wife about blogs." But I know they mean well, of course, and I certainly do appreciate the support.
My wife has yet to read the entry, but when I told her what I put in the pullquote she just grinned.
As for where I got the idea for the pullquote/inset thing (since people have mentioned it in the past as well), it was from a magnificent article at ALA called Reading Design (yep, their style switching code may not be perfect, but stuff like this is spot on). At the end of the article the author has "An Entirely Incomplete List of Things a Non?Illiterate Designer Should Know Before Being a Designer." Every one of the points he makes is well worth considering, but I was especially struck by the second one: "That words themselves make remarkably effective clip art." It was almost like an epiphany for me, and in a flash I saw exactly what you see on the front page of my site today (if the style sheets are actually working, that is). I'm not sure if that's what he was talking about, but it inspired me, and that's where the idea came from.
I'm not sure that I've ever seen a blog/journal with a pullquote in it, but I really like it. It takes a certain amount of guts to pullquote your own words (which I managed to get around this first time by quoting my wife), but if you do it right I think it can have a great impact. I specifically chose that quote, not because I felt oppressed by my wife or I wanted to whine about what she said, but because I knew it would catch the eye and make people want to read more. It's something like beginning a conversation with someone by slapping them in the face--at the very least you know they're not going to just walk away from you. ;-)
Ah, but I'm rambling again, and this is probably not the place for it. I will try to get around to the style issue ASAP, and I'll let you know how it goes (or, I guess, you'll let me know how it goes).
I really like the coastal color scheme, yummy... I don't really understand though why you have such a huge section along the left of your page devoted to that image. I don't know much about this stuff thought, I just thought I would mention it...
Have you ever tried reading wall-to-wall text on a computer screen? It ain't the greatest experience, at least not for most people. Keeping lines at a reasonable length makes the reading experience more pleasant, primarily because it is not as hard to find the beginning of the next line (line spacing also helps with this). When the lines get too long it gets harder to find the beginning of the next line and you end up wasting time scanning the lines to reestablish your vertical position, thus breaking the flow of the reading experience. At least that's always been my experience and my philosophy.
Anyway, I never quite thought of it as having a "huge space" devoted to the background picture; I always just thought of it as having a picture in the left margin... take a look at the retro scheme to get a better feel for what I mean--the background image there isn't fixed, so the left margin is just plain white once you scroll down. I find it rather refreshing when I get sick of looking at the other color schemes.
So, hopefully that explains the reasoning behind the huge space on the left. If you still disagree, perhaps you could elaborate--I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.
OK, I switched over to Slime's js code, but I'm not sure how it's working. It seems to work fine in Netscape, but in IE it starts out as the default style before switching to the current style sheet. It's a bit annoying, but if everything else works fine, I think I can live with it. At any rate, it will be better than the other code, which didn't work at all at times.
Yeah, my code will use the default style until the page finishes loading, at which point it switches.
You could use document.write to avoid this, I suppose, although writing the <link> tags via server side scripting would be a better solution (since it doesn't ruin the integrity of the document).
Yea, I have tried reading wall to wall text, thanks for asking though.
You are right, it is pretty easy to read your page, and I rather like it. I was just thinking maybe the "margin" on the left is a bit large, and there is a bunch of wasted space over there. Maybe you could put the change color scheme thing over there, and perhaps the menu you have running across the top, that way if someone was reading your stuff, and they were half way through, if they wanted to go to something else, they could just click on the menu in the left margin. I don't know, just a suggestion.
Slime: Do you mean using SSS to write the <link> tags in addition to your code, or just going with a SSS solution from the start?
GN: Thanks for the suggestion. I appreciate it (even if I may not follow it ).
I think it really boils down to a fundamental difference in our ways of thinking, which is not necessarily a bad thing. It just means that we disagree on some points. You, for example, see the space on the left as "wasted space," whereas I see it as "white space" that adds to the design. Who is right? Well, it's not really a matter of who is right, it's just a matter of opinion. My opinion is that having the white space on the left gives me the option of presenting another design element or just leaving it blank to balance out the page.
I deliberately avoided the "menu left, content right" layout with this design--it just seemed too standard for me. If it were an informational/business/etc. site, I probably would have gone that way, but this is my personal site, and I wanted to try a different direction. I don't consider the color schemes to be such a vital part of the site that they should be always visible, and, as for the menu--well, if someone is only halfway through a page and they decide to go somewhere else, then I guess I've failed in my task, haven't I? ;-)
So, while I do appreciate your comments and suggestions, I think I'm going to stick with what I've got (at least for the time being). I gave the layout a lot of thought when I first started to put this site together, and it has evolved over the course of the design process into something that I'm satisfied with. This may change at some point in the future, but for now I'm going to go the white space route.
Ah, thanks Boudga. I threw an updated link in the middle of the thread when I bumped this back up again, but I suppose that's gotten lost in the shuffle. The first link has now been updated, which should make it easier on everyone.
Weird... did you try some of the other color schemes? The first two have that "screen" graphic that overlays the background, but the third and fourth have solid backgrounds in the content div. The background for the fifth one doesn't have a fixed background at all.
If you get the chance, could you try the other schemes and see if you take the same hit? If not, then it's definitely the overlay, and I'll look into doing something about it. I appreciate the feedback on this.
While we're at it, has anyone else experienced similar problems?
posted 02-24-2003 15:13
