Site Check

[Moshambi]

Hey guys,

I figured a lot of you have helped me get to this point so I thought I would share.

Tell me what you think (and be brutally honest )

freshandfunky.mycorpweb.com

Some things to note though are:

1. I know there are some layout issues.
2. I know that I need to work on more cross-browser support.
3. I also know that I need to work on doing something so it looks better in lower screen resolutions.

Thanks for any input if you have any!

[magicyte]

<input type="positive/negitive">
Uh, the name isn't TOO appealing, but as for the rest, I think it is pretty cool.
</input>

-magicyte

[Moshambi]

you mean fresh and funky? Thats the name cuz it is for my clan on a game =) Thanks for replying! I also just fixed the layout problems I was having with the user profiles.

[Medyman]

I'm not sure what there is to comment on. It's all very bare bones at the moment. I wouldn't call it an especially aesthetically pleasing or an inviting website, though.

The code is all very good though.

[Moshambi]

First, thank you for the comment on the good code

Second, ya I am slowly finding out as I check it more and more and talk to people about it that it pretty much looks visually horrible...So I really have that to work on.

As of now though, I am happy that it functions like its supposed to.

Thanks for the reply medyman!

[Twey]

This site is best viewed in 1280 x 1024 Resolution.
This site is best viewed in IE7 or Firefox

... under the light of the full moon in July while Mercury is in Leo and six pygmy marmosets do the lambada behind you singing 'Kumbayah'.

How about you fix your site so it's flexible and standards-compliant, rather than advising the user change his/her browser and resolution to ones that, coincidentally, showed your site as you intended it to be viewed, with your fonts and settings?

The code is horrible, too -- you've got invalid markup, an outdated and unsupported DOCTYPE, invalid CSS, inline CSS, presentational markup, and your colour compliance is dodgy, and that's just what I can see on the client side.
How about you go through my List?

[TheJoshMan]

... under the light of the full moon in July while Mercury is in Leo and six pygmy marmosets do the lambada behind you singing 'Kumbayah'.

LMFAO!

I think you forgot to say "while sharing a hookah with three leprechauns"!

[Moshambi]

... under the light of the full moon in July while Mercury is in Leo and six pygmy marmosets do the lambada behind you singing 'Kumbayah'.

How about you fix your site so it's flexible and standards-compliant, rather than advising the user change his/her browser and resolution to ones that, coincidentally, showed your site as you intended it to be viewed, with your fonts and settings?

The code is horrible, too -- you've got invalid markup, an outdated and unsupported DOCTYPE, invalid CSS, inline CSS, presentational markup, and your colour compliance is dodgy, and that's just what I can see on the client side.
How about you go through my List?

Thanks.

[Moshambi]

Okay Twey I've been trying to clean up this mess and been looking at your advice.

1. I tried to include the XHTML Strict DTD in my code but it gave me even more errors. I'm not sure if it is because it is a PHP file or what?

2. Just curious what do you mean by "presentational markup" ?

Thanks for any help.

[Twey]

You didn't go through my List, did you. XHTML is not the optimal choice right now.

Yes, adding a valid DOCTYPE will cause the validator to give you more errors, because then it knows what it's meant to be looking for. Without a DOCTYPE it will use a very lax default DTD, which won't pick up most of your problems.

The rest of your questions are answered by the List.