Posted by windandwaves on 07/02/07 03:33

On Jul 2, 1:30 pm, "rf" <r...@invalid.com> wrote:
> "windandwaves" <nfranc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1183337061.452358.124030@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Jul 2, 10:52 am, dorayme <doraymeRidT...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> In article
> >> <1183324106.197038.14...@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> >> windandwaves <nfranc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi Folk
> >> Nice clean look of this site, disconcerting to have the
> >> thumbnails overlay the text if the browser window is even as wide
> >> as 800px.
> > They dont, ONLY when you resize the window after loading - which is
> > pretty rare and then again, the next page will load fine. Just try it.
>
> I would think that resizing of the window would *always* occur (if it does
> at all) immediately after loading: Load site, ah, need to resize.
>
> Why not just use the fallback you already have there for when javascript is
> disabled[1]. All you need to do is ajust the width a bit to get rid of all
> the white space.
>
> [1] why use perfectly good CSS an then cover it up with some broken
> javascript that some large percentage of your viewers (read potential
> customers) will not see anyway? And if they do see it then will they think:
> "Hmmm, something odd about this site when I resize. I wonder if this oddness
> will be in the site I might get them to build for me?". The browser is
> perfectly capable of resizing your content based on window size.

I agree with the above and I have changed it accordingly

> Your menu is inside out. The language you present in (English) reads left to
> right.
>
> The thumbnails are very poor. Slice out an interesting bit of the image, not
> just the top right hand corner. Any thumbnail of a picture with sky in it is
> just blue. Hang on. Those are not thumbnails. You are sending me an entire
> 50K image and just ising the top left hand corner :-)

The points above are a matter of style. I like it this way.....

> --
> Richard.

[Back to original message]