August 4th, 2008, 05:27 AM
Developer's block: http://www.retrodata.co.uk
I know it needs changing but both I and the site owner like the basic concept behind the design.
However, I think it needs changing with regards to content. There is a lot that no one will read through. It needs splitting up more.
However I'm stuck - need inspiration!
Last edited by janusz-jasinski; August 4th, 2008 at 05:31 AM.
August 4th, 2008, 07:33 AM
August 12th, 2008, 03:25 AM
I've changed the front page around a little. I really need to get it sorted.
Getting rid of the testiomonials and putting a gradient on the links might be a good idea
August 13th, 2008, 12:14 PM
There is a difference between the Home and Contact, News and Photos pages - the navigation moves slightly. I would just have a page for testimonials and show one or two (they make the page long). If you're going to have a tiny left navigation the testimonials should be underneath otherwise put them on the right IMO.
The left navigation seems to be a continuation of the top. I would just put the essential links along the top and ALL links down the left-hand side. Perhaps group the three services together under Services. You need to change the style of the links and not use the defaults - I think a should look the same as a:visited.
Don't give the same page different names; choose between News and RetroBlog and Photos and RetroGallery.
Give me reputation if I'm helpful, use the scales icon, top right-hand corner (
August 14th, 2008, 02:54 AM
Yup - I agree.
Unfortunately I got the page looking very good, then another developer came in and pretty much messed the whole thing up. Now I'm trying to clean what he did!
August 14th, 2008, 07:47 AM
The design is secondary to the markup - you've currently got 27 errors according to http://validator.w3.org
Might want to check those out Always, always, always validate your pages during development.
August 14th, 2008, 09:54 AM
I know this - however, not everyone that comes to the site thinks "hmm, I must see if this page validates". The sites seems to work well in the major browsers that I've tested on various OS'
I'm trying to clean the mess that was left but this is taking a while.
August 15th, 2008, 06:36 AM
That doesn't matter. If your page validates it's more likely to work in the long-run for all prominent browsers. It also reflects on how seriously you take your work. Try this in any other area:
Originally Posted by janusz-jasinski
"That's Mr. Jones, he built my children's tree-house. I'm not really interested in if he built it to spec or not. It seems to hold the kids alright. My children will have their friends over this weekend to play in it to."
"Mrs. Smith, here's your car keys. We worked on your engine extensively. Our senior mechanic was out sick today, so we let Earl work on your car. Unfortunately we didn't follow procedure, or the manuals, but the car seems to be working alright - we can't promise anything though."
And finally in the area of development, you have to sell your client a product that isn't even valid markup. Imagine their countenance if they hear that they bough a product that is gravely invalid. Do you think they would return to pay you for more service in the future, knowing they won't be getting a valid product?
Comments on this post
August 27th, 2008, 07:36 AM
I have stated that I didn't do the changes to make it invalid and I would rather work on what the user sees and interacts with first rather than worrying about valid markup.
Yes it's important - hell, I have done essays on it but in this particular situation, it has to take a back seat whilst I get everything else in order
August 27th, 2008, 02:02 PM
By this, I take it you mean the look and feel. If this is the case,
then contrary to the disapprovals received by Mr Sampson, he is right.
As Adrastea0413 stated, they are only guidelines and recommendation.
However, if you want any sort of cross browser compatibility -
you have to start from the bottom up.
HTML markup and the CSS for presentation is the foundation.
Starting correctly from the beginning also makes fixing in the future....
And don't stick the valid images on your page if they are not,
people just may click them to see what happens
Now, you may know your market, and not feel that it matters.
But unless your market is captive and never going to change,
I would at least investigate this.
That being said, you didn't post here to get nagged about that,
you were more concerned about the content right?
TBH, I quite like the design. Simple but effective.
I can tell almost exactly what you do before the fold, so thumbs up there too..
The fonts seem a bit plain, but then I am on Ubuntu and may not have (m)any of the windows based fonts on my machine.
Does the font size change,
or is that just my dodgy eyesight?
Perhaps you could 2.0 is a bit, and user rounded corners for the main container,
and use reflections on your logo???
I agree about the comment on keeping the page names the same..
Sorry, probably haven't really told you anything you don't know or
haven't heard already.
>_ skiFFie ? | Twitter
Let the might of your compassion arise to bring a quick end
to the flowing stream of the blood and tears .....
Please hear my anguished words of truth.
August 28th, 2008, 03:54 AM
I understand and more importantly know a lot of the stuff that's being said here. I preach it myself! I just need the time to do it
August 28th, 2008, 06:49 AM
Overall I think the look and feel is fine. Hwoever it looks a little too "techy", perhaps because of the cool colours and the font.
I would remove the underline hyperlink from the testimonials and replace it with a simple more at the end of each snippet. Long underlined sections of text are difficult on the eye.
October 17th, 2008, 10:09 AM
October 17th, 2008, 12:10 PM
could you maybe have look at a grid layout rather than list?
although i like the design at the minute in terms of it's simplicity, having a grid layout with key information in would mean that something like your current client list (which is quite impressive) could me moved higher up the page
I am talking only about the homepage here...
October 18th, 2008, 11:03 AM
I suppose so - could give it a go