Could I get some critiques?

[Jesdisciple]

Here's the site that I've built with immense help from DD: http://jesdisciple.110mb.com/index.php (And I'm not attached to the colors at all; that's just what came with the template + some colors I got from a program.)

How do all the different components work for you? Particularly...
Does the font-color jive with the header's background on each page? If not, do you have any suggestions?
Do you have suggestions for (tiling) banners that would work better on any of the pages?
Is the menu's way of highlighting your current location confusing?
How can I improve the color coordination? (Note that different pages have different banners; I think they should be left out of the decision.)
Of course, please mention anything else that stands out.
Thanks!

[jscheuer1]

For the time being, I'm just looking at the page you provided a link to. The pebble/rocks whatever background image makes it hard (not impossible) to read the text. The entire page looks as though it were just thrown together, there's no sense of flow or unity, it's just there, rather it's just pieces that are there ail on one page, with a lot of empty space (1440 x 900 res).

The code isn't valid:

http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fjesdisciple.110mb.com%2Findex.php

That's not necessarily a bad thing if your intention is to render in quirksmode and you know how to do that. It does appear to render about the same in various browsers. So without considering what I mentioned above about its appearance, at least it is fairly consistent across browsers. If the design were tighter and/or more elaborate though, spacing in some browsers would probably become an issue. My reason for saying this is that in FF 3 the menu on the left is shorter than in other browsers.

There are no errors reported in FF or IE as regards the javascript.

The styles are a bit shaky (two errors, many warnings):

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css2&warning=2&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fjesdisciple.110mb.com%2Findex.php

I like the quote, "Go and sin no more" has always been a personal favorite of mine for the combination of authority and compassion it embodies, not to mention its (comic) infamy as regards a certain edition where a typo resulted in "Go and sin on more."

[Twey]

The page is invalid, using an outdated DTD, and the header is virtually unreadable. Fade those images. The spacing is irregular, the search box doesn't fit in with the colour scheme, and while white-on-blue can be done properly, this isn't an example I'd use to prove that. The alignment on the menus goes funny without Javascript. Those menus are a devil to navigate and provide a form of mystery-meat navigation. While white and blue can be made to work, yellow and blue really can't, and orange and blue is even worse (the gutter-line). Your footer ends up halfway up the page in Gecko if the content extends that far, and off-screen (for me) if it doesn't.

This page (http://www.webreference.com/authoring/graphics/color/nondesigners/chap2/1/) may help you, as well as the tutorials linked in my signature.
There is also a colour contrast checker (http://snook.ca/technical/colour_contrast/colour.html) to check the accessibility of any colour scheme you might choose. Remember, this has to apply to text over images too!

Beware W3Schools. Their tutorials are outdated and full of 'errors, omissions, and deceit'. A lot of things on there are left out, badly-worded, or just plain wrong. There have been numerous complaints on the forum over the years, which W3Schools themselves have simply ignored. Avoid using them, and certainly don't recommend them.

[hyk]

Beware W3Schools. Their tutorials are outdated and full of 'errors, omissions, and deceit'. A lot of things on there are left out, badly-worded, or just plain wrong. There have been numerous complaints on the forum over the years, which W3Schools themselves have simply ignored. Avoid using them, and certainly don't recommend them.


Really??? I start learning html & stuffs from there. Even my school recommend it. I being conned by my school i suppose

[Jesdisciple]

For the time being, I'm just looking at the page you provided a link to. The pebble/rocks whatever background image makes it hard (not impossible) to read the text. The entire page looks as though it were just thrown together, there's no sense of flow or unity, it's just there, rather it's just pieces that are there ail on one page, with a lot of empty space (1440 x 900 res).I honestly have no idea what you mean by "sense of flow or unity." And I think there's empty space just because I don't have any content to speak of on most pages.


The code isn't valid:

http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fjesdisciple.110mb.com%2Findex.php

That's not necessarily a bad thing if your intention is to render in quirksmode and you know how to do that. It does appear to render about the same in various browsers. So without considering what I mentioned above about its appearance, at least it is fairly consistent across browsers. If the design were tighter and/or more elaborate though, spacing in some browsers would probably become an issue. My reason for saying this is that in FF 3 the menu on the left is shorter than in other browsers.Yeah, I got the layout working on Windows where I still had IE. I need to work with ies4linux a bit more to see if it can cooperate. See my below response to Twey.


There are no errors reported in FF or IE as regards the javascript.

The styles are a bit shaky (two errors, many warnings):

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css2&warning=2&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fjesdisciple.110mb.com%2Findex.phpLOL, that shows very clearly where my emphasis is, for better or worse.


I like the quote, "Go and sin no more" has always been a personal favorite of mine for the combination of authority and compassion it embodies, not to mention its (comic) infamy as regards a certain edition where a typo resulted in "Go and sin on more."I never imagined any non-Christian would like that quote... Sin isn't a very popular subject.

I vaguely recall reading about that before. It's funny in a sad way...


The page is invalid, using an outdated DTD,Actually, it's not using any DTD... I haven't got around to that yet.


and the header is virtually unreadable. Fade those images.Do you know of a good tutorial for fading in the GIMP?


The spacing is irregular,Where?


the search box doesn't fit in with the colour scheme,How do you mean?


and while white-on-blue can be done properly, this isn't an example I'd use to prove that.I'm getting some help for that via PM. I'll update this thread when I've applied it.


The alignment on the menus goes funny without Javascript.What browser are you using? I just used the Developer Toolbar in Fx3 to disable JavaScript and didn't notice any difference except that submenus drop back on the very left.


Those menus are a devil to navigate and provide a form of mystery-meat navigation....Huh? Could you post a screenshot?


While white and blue can be made to work, yellow and blue really can't, and orange and blue is even worse (the gutter-line).The orange is just for contrast in the headers. What color should links be?


Your footer ends up halfway up the page in Gecko if the content extends that far,See the thread Why is my DIV falling down the page? (http://www.dynamicdrive.com/forums/showthread.php?p=156363).


and off-screen (for me) if it doesn't.That's because I put the height at 100% and a tableless design doesn't really understand that as I do. And I'm not sure what to do about it...


This page (http://www.webreference.com/authoring/graphics/color/nondesigners/chap2/1/) may help you, as well as the tutorials linked in my signature.I get no content to speak of (just enough to tell me what I'm not getting), and the same JS error twice, on that page.
Error: OAS_RICH is not defined
Source File: http://www.webreference.com/authoring/graphics/color/nondesigners/chap2/1/
Line: 125


There is also a colour contrast checker (http://snook.ca/technical/colour_contrast/colour.html) to check the accessibility of any colour scheme you might choose. Remember, this has to apply to text over images too!That page does work; I'll try to use it before my next post to this thread.


Beware W3Schools. Their tutorials are outdated and full of 'errors, omissions, and deceit'. A lot of things on there are left out, badly-worded, or just plain wrong. There have been numerous complaints on the forum over the years, which W3Schools themselves have simply ignored. Avoid using them, and certainly don't recommend them.Do you know of a good replacement? (I've noticed many errors myself, but what they do have beats anything else I've seen.)

[Twey]

Actually, it's not using any DTD... I haven't got around to that yet.Should have been the first thing you did.
Do you know of a good tutorial for fading in the GIMP?The sort of fading I'm talking about, just put a fully white layer over the image, then lower its opacity until you like it and it contrasts well with your text colour (contrast checker). If you wanted to do that gradient fading thing everyone does these days, do the same but for the minimum opacity you want, then put another white layer over the top fading to black (use the gradient tool) and do a 'colour to alpha' to convert the black to transparency.
Where [is the spacing irregular]?Everywhere, but especially on the menus. You need more whitespace in general, and it should be more even and 'balanced'.
...Huh? Could you post a screenshot?Exactly what you see. I'm talking about the design decision, it's not a bug. Navigating those menus requires a steady hand, you can't immediately or continuously see all the pages on offer, and they make keyboard navigation impossible.
What browser are you using? I just used the Developer Toolbar in Fx3 to disable JavaScript and didn't notice any difference except that submenus drop back on the very left.Fx3, now. Seamonkey (~Fx2) earlier. The page menu drops back quite far, underneath its parent menu. The top item goes over the top, though, so it seems to go further back. It all looks very broken.
The orange is just for contrast in the headers. What color should links be?It's not 'what colour should links be', it's 'what colour will go well with my design?' Blue and orange do not go well together, and are particularly hard to read for people with even 20/20 vision: probably impossible for those suffering from colour-blindness. The yellow is much better.
That's because I put the height at 100% and a tableless design doesn't really understand that as I do. And I'm not sure what to do about it...http://ryanfait.com/resources/footer-stick-to-bottom-of-page/
I get no content to speak of (just enough to tell me what I'm not getting), and the same JS error twice, on that page.Hm, really? Works OK here, no errors (except CSS ones). Fx3.
Do you know of a good replacement? (I've noticed many errors myself, but what they do have beats anything else I've seen.)For tutorials, the site linked in my signature. For reference, the specifications themselves, or http://developer.mozilla.org/ or MSDN for Javascript.

[jscheuer1]

Let's see. I'm not into a point by point quote and response mood at the moment. I will try to cover most of what you commented on from my original post.

The flow or unity of a page is subjective, but most folks can just recognise what those concepts mean. I did try to elaborate when I mentioned something about the items on the page just seeming to be there. What I mean is that there is no (or very little) overall concept or feel communicated by the visual experience of looking at the page.

Twey has fairly well covered the issue of a DOCTYPE. This would also likely bring more consistency to the page's rendering across browsers.

I believe it ("go and sin on more") is known as the adulterer's bible.

I do take (mild) issue with your characterization of me as a non-Christian. What is a Christian? In my experience the definition varies widely depending upon who is setting the definition. Without looking it up, I believe one definition could be "a kind and just person".

Which is why I like the particular quote you used. The Bible, regardless of one's religious persuasion, is still a significant work of literature.

[mburt]

The site layout is good...
However I want to bring up these points:

-Validation (already covered)
-The contrast on your site is pretty bad. Generally, the background is lighter, and text is darker, or vice-versa. So the users can read it. And your heading seems to be lacking this principal
-Twey mentioned the spacing. Padding can be a big thing to improve the "readability" of your site. It makes the text seem more clear, and less jumbled up.
-Personally, I don't think the blue matches the homepage header.

Those are just my thoughts on your site! :)