Site Critique on Something i am making

Webmonkey

Hey There guys,

Working on a website: http://trakehner.emerald.ie

Ok i know its german so a lot of ye mightn't understand it hehe, i don't even understand it myself!
The links on top are working so if you want to see how the floating frames work on it.

What ye think?

Seth Brundle

dont know is it cos im tired or just dumb but I found myself clicking on the buttons above the links [on the left]wondering why they weren't working
dont know if it is intentional but the email link at the bottom right isn't complete
other than that - I like it

Seth Brundle

actually what is the K for in the bottom left?
Use ALT text with your images!!!!!!!!!

Webmonkey

Originally posted by kbannon
actually what is the K for in the bottom left?
Use ALT text with your images!!!!!!!!!

Ummm well thats the control panel of the site for the guys that will be updating it. Yeah ALT on images good idea tho I didn't get around to this yet, yep the email link is the same nothing happening. Don't mind hte links on the left. the top right links are the only ones working. I know that i should wait till its fully completed but it may end up not being completed - its only a demo yet

Thanks for the comments

mneylon

Please go off and study web standards and their correct implementation. I'm on a 2MB connection and that page took a longtime to load. Your coding does not respect the browser parsing model, you haven't got any ALT or TITLE tags for any of your images. You've also used tags that don't exist within other ones. You haven't set a DTD.

Webmonkey

Originally posted by blacknight
Please go off and study web standards and their correct implementation. I'm on a 2MB connection and that page took a longtime to load. Your coding does not respect the browser parsing model, you haven't got any ALT or TITLE tags for any of your images. You've also used tags that don't exist within other ones. You haven't set a DTD.

Actually i just got books 2day so they should keep me busy

buddy

What do you mean floating frames?? The frame for which the page changes - it works OK.

Webmonkey

Originally posted by buddy
What do you mean floating frames?? The frame for which the page changes - it works OK.

The tags <IFrame></IFRAME>

yeah i think it suits it

buddy

I've actually never used iframe's - I thought there was a browser compatability issue so I build frames around my target frame.

Webmonkey

Originally posted by buddy
I've actually never used iframe's - I thought there was a browser compatability issue so I build frames around my target frame.

Umm i think all browsers support them now. Am I correct in saying that?

peterd

http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/html/supportkey/i.htm

buddy

Originally posted by peterd
http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/html/supportkey/i.htm

That just confused the hell out of me - but it looks like Mosiac sucks ass

Webmonkey

Originally posted by buddy
That just confused the hell out of me - but it looks like Mosiac sucks ass

I think i have to agree with you there :eek:

mneylon

Mosaic revolutionised the 'net, so don't knock it

Gmodified

Originally posted by blacknight
Please go off and study web standards and their correct implementation. I'm on a 2MB connection and that page took a longtime to load. Your coding does not respect the browser parsing model, you haven't got any ALT or TITLE tags for any of your images. You've also used tags that don't exist within other ones. You haven't set a DTD.


Please go off and check your 2MB connections as looks like it is not running up to speed. I have much slower connection and page loaded just OK.

Mosiac:D definitely suck$

as for the page:

Not bad for starters

mneylon

Originally posted by Gmodified
Originally posted by blacknight
Please go off and study web standards and their correct implementation. I'm on a 2MB connection and that page took a longtime to load. Your coding does not respect the browser parsing model, you haven't got any ALT or TITLE tags for any of your images. You've also used tags that don't exist within other ones. You haven't set a DTD.


Please go off and check your 2MB connections as looks like it is not running up to speed. I have much slower connection and page loaded just OK.

Mosiac:D definitely suck$

as for the page:

Not bad for starters

The page wasn't parsing properly when I checked it, so your comment is a little out of order.

You obviously never used Mosaic, so you wouldn't know what I'm talking about.

The page was terrible.

Gmodified

Stop leaving in the past, Mosaic maybe started digital revolution back in the old days but unfortunately as idea maybe alive==> Mosaic is dead

mneylon

Originally posted by Gmodified
Stop leaving in the past, Mosaic maybe started digital revolution back in the old days but unfortunately as idea maybe alive==> Mosaic is dead

I agree entirely, it is part of history. I don't think anybody's using it anymore (at least I hope they aren't)

It was one of the previous comments that riled me a little. I know that in comparison with current browsers it sucks - of course it does. It couldn't be expected to support features that weren't available when it was released. However the way the message was posted did not allow for that, which I thought was a little out of hand.

Gmodified

Agree, My respect still goes to Mosaic for changing the way forward when comes to internet browser and we can't really compare it to new applications. Yeah, Sucks is not a perfect word for it and not a smart comment.

maybe --dated by current standards ?:)

mneylon

Originally posted by Gmodified
maybe --dated by current standards ?:)

That's a very nice way of putting it

If you look back over the last ten years... windows 3.1, windows 95, various versions of X etc., etc., they all look dated now...

(Sigh)

peterd

Blacknight has a point about the download time. The page+images are around 150KB which seems a tad excessive for what the user is getting for it. You could do a lot of trimming on those images. (I like to keep it around the 30-40KB mark for dial-up users)

Of course, if you expect your target market (germans?) have fast connections, you might "get away" with it.

Webmonkey

Originally posted by blacknight
I agree entirely, it is part of history. I don't think anybody's using it anymore (at least I hope they aren't)

It was one of the previous comments that riled me a little. I know that in comparison with current browsers it sucks - of course it does. It couldn't be expected to support features that weren't available when it was released. However the way the message was posted did not allow for that, which I thought was a little out of hand.

Sorry blacknight - what do you mean by the way the post was posted?

mneylon

Basically the post said that it sucked full stop, which is a stupid comment to make unless you qualify it, which both Gmodified and I have done subsequently

Webmonkey

I don't understand how to post said it sucked? I don't know where ur coming from

mneylon

I rest my case:

quote:

---

Originally posted by buddy
That just confused the hell out of me - but it looks like Mosiac sucks ass

---

I think i have to agree with you there

Gmodified

Keep reading, Webmonkey.

Webmonkey

Yeha it was confusing? So that page looked like i don't know something else

boo-boo

http://validator.w3.org

If I were you I'd check your work with this tool, its supplied by w3.org- the web standards body.

Webmonkey

Originally posted by boo-boo
http://validator.w3.org

If I were you I'd check your work with this tool, its supplied by w3.org- the web standards body.

Yep thanks i know bout it allready

Maybe others that go complaining about my site should go check their own sites with it first

nahdoic

Originally posted by Webmonkey
Maybe others that go complaining about my site should go check their own sites with it first

...? If we're all wrong then it's ok?

Webmonkey

Originally posted by nahdoic
...? If we're all wrong then it's ok?

Umm i'm only talkin bout 1 person in particular - all the rest of ye fine