View Full Version : recommendations
scem0
Jun 13, 2004, 05:11 AM
I am not exactly having trouble thinking up ways to make my site look better... It is more of an issue of trying to find ways to make it look better while keeping it simple.
So, if you have a creative eye, please go to EmoOnline.com (http://EmoOnline.com) and tell me what I can change to make it look better (or be more functional).
by the way, I know that all the links don't go anywhere... I am just designing for now.
scem0
Chip NoVaMac
Jun 13, 2004, 07:45 AM
Just some quick thoughts:
Not inviting. The text is too small. Dislike the little 'java" menu scrolling down as i scroll down.
edesignuk
Jun 13, 2004, 07:58 AM
Text is way to small. I don't mind the moving menu :)
wowser
Jun 13, 2004, 08:10 AM
yeah - the text is certainly too small. it looks fiddly - like one of those awful blog sites where the author is thrying to get all JApanesey and stuff. Moving menu... nah
scem0
Jun 13, 2004, 09:50 AM
I gotta keep the font size pretty small, because I'm catering to young 'uns.
But I'll change it from 9px to 11px.
As for the java menu, that stays. I know for a fact that my mom and my friends can't get enough of it. And it has worked in every browser i've tried except mac os x IE.
scem0
edesignuk
Jun 13, 2004, 10:10 AM
I gotta keep the font size pretty small, because I'm catering to young 'uns.
If you're catering for "young 'uns" why have such a tiny font? If anything that would make me think larger fonts would be required :confused:
Knox
Jun 13, 2004, 11:04 AM
I don't particularly like animated menus like that. What would be much preferable for me would be a floating menu that stayed in the same position when you scrolled, but wasn't animated - like you have with the microphone.
I don't mind the font size as much, although i think the font size in the header needs to be bigger.
I think i'd prefer it if the microphone was fixed to the right hand side of the content box, rather than being aligned to the right of the window - so that only half of it appears no matter what size the window is set to.
mnkeybsness
Jun 13, 2004, 01:12 PM
i apologize in advance because this might be a little painful...
1-public service ads? seriously... if it is not completely relative to the site... take it off
2-(see attachment 1) what is going on here? i'm not sure what everything is supposed to be because everything looks exactly the same
3-small monitors and/or small window sizes are not going to see the microphone at all--it will be covered with the content.
4-(see attachment 2) this is a bad coding practice. you should only be using one <p>and have <br /> (breaks) for the lines instead of new paragraphs. this way you won't have to use (non-breakable space)
5-check the validation (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Femoonline.com) for this page... you keep defining and ID inside of the same ID... this is a "no no"
6-the moving menu really has no point in being there. nothing else on the page has this sliding effect, so it just seems very out of place. it's more of a distraction than anything else. you should make it a fixed position element (you will actually need some javascript to make IE WIN work properly if you do this... otherwise make it an absolute position
7-using tables for layout purposes has been decided as one of the worst ways to design a site with. read about a better way to do it (http://www.alistapart.com/articles/practicalcss/)
Knox
Jun 13, 2004, 01:26 PM
1-public service ads? seriously... if it is not completely relative to the site... take it off
To be fair this is to do with Google - either the page hasn't been spidered yet, or because there's no real content on the page Google can't work out what ads to place. In both cases the public service ads are used rather than content-related ads.
Having said that - you can replace those ads with an image or html of your choice, which is usually a good idea.
scem0
Jun 13, 2004, 06:16 PM
Yeah, thanks for all the help.
I really will take it to heart, and work on the site. I am a big amateur when it comes to web design, so I thank y'all for being honest with me.
btw, the weird line breaks and stuff is just what dreamweaver does. I'm not doing this in pure html. Not the text, anyways.
Oh, and table-less layouts are a totally foreign concept to me. I'll look into it and see how I can work with that.
(btw - I didn't spend long at all on that design, so remaking it is no pain :)... After all, that was the point of this thread. To see what I could do with the design before it was too late).
Thanks,
scem0
scem0
Jun 14, 2004, 05:07 PM
The new design is standards compliant, looks better, and I am much happier with it.
This thread was definitely a success :).
scem0
Chip NoVaMac
Jun 14, 2004, 06:22 PM
The new design is standards compliant, looks better, and I am much happier with it.
This thread was definitely a success :).
scem0
The site is better looking.
Though for those of us with the PB 12" the font is still too small IMO.
the navigation frame could be done with "frames" and would remain static as we scrolled...
scem0
Jun 14, 2004, 08:20 PM
all I'd have to do to make the nav frame static is change it's position type in the CSS. I might do that.
scem0
edit - In fact I did that, just to see what it look like. I don't mind it that way, but I'll see what other say
superninjagoat
Jun 15, 2004, 04:29 PM
all I'd have to do to make the nav frame static is change it's position type in the CSS. I might do that.
scem0
edit - In fact I did that, just to see what it look like. I don't mind it that way, but I'll see what other say
Changing the scrolling menu fixed an issue in Win IE 6 where the menu displayed to the far left after the rest of the page content. Now it's at the top of the left-hand column. And that's cool with me.
I'm not big on the dashed lines around the left and right navigation elements (although separating content in the main area with dashed lines is fine.). The high-contrast between the black background and the white dashes, coupled with the refresh rate (96hz on my computer) cause the dashes to look like they are moving in the preprimary when I read the text. It's like marching ants that only march with you're not looking at them. Very disturbing. :eek: I'd hate to try it at a lower refresh rate.
Anyway, I'd change them to the elegant white border of the main content, both for the reason stated above and for consistency’s sake. As I've stated on these forums before, I am a big proponent of monochrome websites, and grayscale is my favorite scheme (perhaps it's my newspaper background).
One thing you've done that I applaud: Typically, when going for a grayscale site, people make the mistake of using true blacks and whites for backgrounds. They are boring and hard on the eyes. The background you've chosen is, for all practical purposes, black, yet it's so much better than if you'd actually used black. Good job!
In your news tables, you need to add html container elements around the "posted by: {username} on {date}" line. Right now it just floats in the body element. While you're at it, you may want to add a CSS class that gives it a bit of white space (gray space?) below each story unit. Right now they're too tight.
There's one other issue I have; You're current navigation isn't long enough to justify a column in and of itself. If you scroll more than a few lines, you're left with nothing more than blank space in the right hand column. (And I could argue that as a right-reading culture, this blank space holds more importance and psychological weight to the average reader, but you'd probably stop reading this post in complete boredom. :D I'm such a dork.)
I suggest a layout where:
[INDENT]a) You make the height of the navigation menu the same as the flag (title banner) and stretch the content <div> across both column one and two.
---------- -------------------- ----------
| menu | | flag | | ads |
| | | | | |
---------- -------------------- | |
-------------------------------- | |
| | | |
| body | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
This has the advantage of putting the information in the left-most position. You could also try a horizontal menu as well. Check out this link (http://css.maxdesign.com.au/listutorial/index.htm) for a cool CSS menu (try example 4) that might do you well.
I say all of this because it looks as if you've given up on the floating menu. Reading the posts, I was under the impression that you still wanted the thing to float, but that I couldn't see it b/c I was on Win IE6, which doesn't do position: fixed. But upon further investigation in Opera (and noticing it didn't move) and then checking your CSS, I see you've used position:absolute for the menu. Until MS decides to implement the standard, I wouldn't design a page that so depends on this feature to plug unsightly white space. It becomes a design flaw for 70-80 percent of your visitors.
Since it looks like you're losing your instant access to navigation (or, if you choose position:fixed, at least for IE Win users) you might consider adding a "back to top" or some such link after each story. It's oldschool, but effective.
Ok, the person I've been waiting on has shown up, so I have to actually start working again. Hope some of this helps. Take it all with a grain of salt. Happy coding! :)
FattyMembrane
Jun 15, 2004, 06:03 PM
the navigation frame could be done with "frames" and would remain static as we scrolled...
frames are a no-no in this day and age...
scem0
Jun 15, 2004, 06:04 PM
Lot's of great criticism and recommendations in that post. :)
You'll definitely see changes at my site reflecting your suggestions. :)
scem0
Chip NoVaMac
Jun 15, 2004, 06:09 PM
frames are a no-no in this day and age...
Why is that? I prefer framed sites....
FattyMembrane
Jun 15, 2004, 08:33 PM
frames are no longer supported in XHTML 1.1 for various reasons, although they'll be making a comeback in the form of XFrames (http://www.w3.org/TR/xframes/) sometime in the near future.
superninjagoat
Jun 16, 2004, 09:35 AM
Lot's of great criticism and recommendations in that post. :)
You'll definitely see changes at my site reflecting your suggestions. :)
scem0
Being that you took so many suggestions, of course I'm going to say that it's SO much cleaner. Now, everyone else will tell you they liked it before or to scrap it entirely. :D
That is to say - the the one thing I didn't have time to write yesterday (but, jeesh, I did right just about everything else under the sun, didn't I. Waaaaaay too much time on my hands.) - go with what you like. Although there are 'rules' to good design, each rule is less important than the feel of the whole. Each designer on this forum has different designs they uphold and others they'd rather ignor - and do.
So, take what I said (and the rest of us in the peanut gallery) with a grain of salt and do what floats your magic twanger. :)
alexf
Jun 16, 2004, 09:02 PM
If you're catering for "young 'uns" why have such a tiny font? If anything that would make me think larger fonts would be required :confused:
Yes, well small type is very "hip" right now, like it or not...
(I personally don't like it, although I think it looks better from a purely design point of view.)
brianellisrules
Jun 16, 2004, 09:03 PM
You were trashing my site and you run emoonline.com? Dude...
alexf
Jun 16, 2004, 09:05 PM
Why is that? I prefer framed sites....
There are many problems with frames, but perhaps the most significant is that they will almost definately result in worse search engine results for your site.
Frames really are more or less dead. I don't know of any current well-known designers who use them... (except for with Flash files for other reasons than they were originally intented).
scem0
Jun 17, 2004, 12:37 AM
You were trashing my site and you run emoonline.com? Dude...
Sorry if I trashed your site.
I can't imagine that I would say anything that bad about it :( because I don't have any major quams with it design wise. And I think the content is great - if I was as eccentric of an individual as you are, I'd definitely make a site like yours :).
I can't seem to find a post where I said anything about your site though.
And EmoOnline is in development. Unfortunately I can't work on it this week. I'm going out of town tomorrow, and when I come back I only have a few days to make another website (this one can be crappy ;)) for a friend for his gaming clan.
If you find that post(s) of mine, I'll try to justify what I said, :o .
scem0
scem0
Jun 19, 2004, 02:45 PM
The site is better looking.
Though for those of us with the PB 12" the font is still too small IMO.
the navigation frame could be done with "frames" and would remain static as we scrolled...
Looks fine to me. I'm on a 12" at an Apple store right now :).
(Not the new one in Austin, the Houston Galleria one).
I still don't know how I can spice up the design of EmoOnline. Everytime I add colors of images it looks goofy and stupid. I might just leave it as is. It is a very functional design right now. Not the most creative, but it will work for everything. And people don't come to sites for the design - they come for the content.
scem0
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.