Posted by Blinky the Shark on 02/02/50 11:49

Jeremy Brown wrote:
> Just an informational response:
>
>>This is (almost) never a good idea. It's the web equivalent of the old
>>DTP tricks for spacing things out by putting empty whitespace elements
>>everywhere.
>
> That is why I wish to do. I have eliminated a ton of older styles in the
> markup. I have elimanted almost all of the depreciated tags on all of the
> pages on my site. I have switched just about all formatting to my style
> sheet.
>
>>If you want [A} and [C] to be presented with some white space between
>>them, then use CSS and bigger margins (probably margin-top on [C]) to
>>set it. Don't create a [B] element just to sit between them - it's
>>just not needed.
>
> This is the kind of information I need. Sometimes the simple solution often
> eludes us. I honestly would not have thought to use the margin functions in
> my CSS since I am still learning how to utilize it to its full potential.
>
>>I doubt you need to, nor should, use a table here -- but that's a separate
>>issue.
>
> The artwork is 5 separate elements, not one. I know you can do that using a
> single image with coordinate mapping and there are other ways, but that is
> not how I wish to do so. The table works rather well in doing what I wish to
> do.
>
>>In general, your markup wants an overall make-over. It's pretty much
>>1997 style, only in XHTML.
>
>>Lose the frames.
>>Lose the HTML 3.2 coding style.
>>Lose the Transitional doctype.
>>Lose the <table>s
>>Lose the rainbow bullets.
>>Lose the frames.
>
>>The XHTML is OK, although many people will proceed to tell you it's wrong.
>
> 1. I am going to dump the frames as soon as I learn how to layout the site
> fully in CSS. (see #3)
> 2. Please read my home page in regards to my HTML skills- I am still
> learning how to do it, hence it isn't beautifully typed up. I am typing all
> of this out in Notepad, and the way I type lets me read it and know what I
> looking at while I work on it.

Kudos for tackling this with a text editor and not some WYSINWYG crutch.
But you might want to consider using a text editor with syntax
highlighting; it'll make your job easier.

> 3. I actually have a version of my site that is Strict, but it does not look
> the way I want it to yet. (see #1)
> 4. The frames do what I want, they validate in Transitional & Strict and I
> like the look.
> 5. How I design may page is not really the point here, I simply want to
> learn HTML and have some fun doing so. I like the way my site looks. It is
> amateurish because that what it is- an amateur HTML coder presenting his
> amateur automotive skills on a personal web page. I am sure that some time
> in the future I will bring the site into the 21st century, maybe 2002 or
> 2003, until then the layout stays- rainbow icons and all.
> 6. See #1 & #3
>
> All this said, why did you need to critique my whole site when I only asked
> a question about an XHTML tag?

You got some bonus input. That's not uncommon here. Don't bitch about it.


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Coming Soon: Filtering rules specific to various real news clients

[Back to original message]