please review spam4it.com

	Home Register Search Help Login

Sponsors

Shopping Cart Software
Ecommerce software integrated into Frontpage, Dreamweaver and Golive templates. No monthly fees and available in ASP and PHP versions.

Website Templates
We also have a wide selection of Dreamweaver, Expression Web and Frontpage templates as well as webmaster tools and CSS layouts.

Frontpage website templates
Creative Website Templates for FrontPage, Dreamweaver, Flash, SwishMax

Search Forums

Recent Posts

Todays Posts
Most Active posts
Posts since last visit
My Recent Posts
Mark posts read

please review spam4it.com

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> Web Design >> Site Critiques >> please review spam4it.com

Page: [1]


spam4it.com Posts: 4 Joined: 1/19/2006 Status: offline	please review spam4it.com - 1/19/2006 18:48:25 Hello people, I've recently created a new website. The purpose is to create the easiest most accessible way of advertising possible. registration is not necessary and validation will not be applies on the submitted website. Please review: spam4it.com


d a v e Posts: 4064 Joined: 7/24/2002 From: England (but live in Finland now) Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 5:23:47 not enough contrast with grey text on grey _____________________________ David Prescott Gekko web design (in reply to spam4it.com)


womble Posts: 5506 Joined: 3/14/2005 From: Living on the edge Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 5:40:05 I could hardly see any text at all, let alone read it. Like Dave says, you need more contrast. _____________________________ ~~ "A cruel god ain't no god at all" ~~ (in reply to d a v e)


spam4it.com Posts: 4 Joined: 1/19/2006 Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 12:14:48 Yeah, i've installed Firefox to locate the problem. It seems that it does not accept override colors within tables. IE shows me a perfectly good white background where the linksubmission reside. Sorry, I will try to fix it. (in reply to womble)

Tailslide

Posts: 5999
Joined: 5/10/2005
From: Out here on the raggedy edge
Status: offline

RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 12:23:51

Don't know if it's the problem but spotted this:

td bgcolor="ffffff"...

try making it

td bgcolor="#ffffff"...

_____________________________

"My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it"
Little Blue Plane Web Design | Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project

(in reply to spam4it.com)


dpf Posts: 7121 Joined: 11/12/2003 From: India-napolis Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 12:25:40 that would do it!!! _____________________________ Dan (in reply to Tailslide)


spam4it.com Posts: 4 Joined: 1/19/2006 Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 14:09:21 shit, IE had no problem with that. Well, to late for that, i'm already making some radical changes to the website. But i'll make sure all the Firefox people can read it to, lol. (in reply to dpf)


d a v e Posts: 4064 Joined: 7/24/2002 From: England (but live in Finland now) Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 14:30:14 lot of validation errors as well http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spam4it.com%2F _____________________________ David Prescott Gekko web design (in reply to spam4it.com)


spam4it.com Posts: 4 Joined: 1/19/2006 Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 15:07:35 I've looked at the validation errors, but those tags and attributes where put in by Dreamweaver and seem to work fine on Firefox and IE (in reply to d a v e)


spitfire Posts: 424 Joined: 8/6/2005 Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 15:21:14 quote: ORIGINAL: spam4it.com I've looked at the validation errors, but those tags and attributes where put in by Dreamweaver and seem to work fine on Firefox and IE They may work today, possibly tomorrow. But unless you tame Dreamweaver, what it does to your code could haunt you for the rest of your (web) life BTW as you're claiming the site to be accessible, why not throw it out for a site critique to a dedicated accessibility forum (in reply to spam4it.com)


d a v e Posts: 4064 Joined: 7/24/2002 From: England (but live in Finland now) Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 15:32:13 i don't think he means Accesible, just accessible ;) DW can write perfectly valid xhtml, but it also does what you tell it: if you make it misbehave then you can only blame yourself! :) the site looks nice btw, but the grey text on white background is still hard to read _____________________________ David Prescott Gekko web design (in reply to spitfire)


spitfire Posts: 424 Joined: 8/6/2005 Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/20/2006 15:46:48 quote: ORIGINAL: d a v e i don't think he means Accesible, just accessible ;) Hunh? I noticed the differences in spelling and capitalization. But, please explain for the hard-of-grokking (in reply to d a v e)


d a v e Posts: 4064 Joined: 7/24/2002 From: England (but live in Finland now) Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/21/2006 2:24:51 difference in spelling is a typo ;) well accessible as in open for people to use, Accessible for those who have, er accessibility needs, er bit of a vague definition but i mean that he means it's easy to use for those that have no Accessibility requirements. sort of. _____________________________ David Prescott Gekko web design (in reply to spitfire)


Tailslide Posts: 5999 Joined: 5/10/2005 From: Out here on the raggedy edge Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/21/2006 3:33:32 quote: ORIGINAL: spam4it.com shit, IE had no problem with that. Well, to late for that, i'm already making some radical changes to the website. But i'll make sure all the Firefox people can read it to, lol. It's still wrong. Plus you're not just talking about FF you'll be talking about Moz, Opera, Safari etc etc PLUS quite possibly IE7.... _____________________________ "My strategy is so simple an idiot could have devised it" Little Blue Plane Web Design \| Blood, Sweat & Rust - A Land Rover restoration project (in reply to spam4it.com)


spitfire Posts: 424 Joined: 8/6/2005 Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/21/2006 5:18:26 quote: ORIGINAL: d a v e difference in spelling is a typo ;) well accessible as in open for people to use, Accessible for those who have, er accessibility needs, er bit of a vague definition but i mean that he means it's easy to use for those that have no Accessibility requirements. sort of. Thanks d a v e and sorry to have put you through that And so, a perfectly good marketeer's word has been highjacked by a relatively small, but constantly growing, group of people working towards global web accessibility for all... sort of (in reply to d a v e)


dpf Posts: 7121 Joined: 11/12/2003 From: India-napolis Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/21/2006 12:39:46 quote: I've looked at the validation errors, but those tags and attributes where put in by Dreamweaver and seem to work fine on Firefox and IE over 100 of those errors (nearly all) were the ommission of < or > or the letter c in the word center. I have used Dreamweaver 3 years and it never never ever made such errors in my experience. _____________________________ Dan (in reply to spam4it.com)


jvthundercat Posts: 30 Joined: 12/30/2005 Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/22/2006 1:16:27 quote: ORIGINAL: spitfire quote: ORIGINAL: spam4it.com I've looked at the validation errors, but those tags and attributes where put in by Dreamweaver and seem to work fine on Firefox and IE They may work today, possibly tomorrow. But unless you tame Dreamweaver, what it does to your code could haunt you for the rest of your (web) life BTW as you're claiming the site to be accessible, why not throw it out for a site critique to a dedicated accessibility forum That's funny, I did a check on this site, frontpagewebmaster.com and came up with multiple errors also. I check over fifty sites including my own and several very well know one's and they all had many many errors, warnings etc. So I guess we will all live in a haunted web world...... (in reply to spitfire)


womble Posts: 5506 Joined: 3/14/2005 From: Living on the edge Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/22/2006 4:44:05 Forum systems are well known for throwing up errors and warnings - it's an inherant problem in using 3rd party software to run them. Large well known sites often run to hundreds/thousands of pages so it's more difficult to make sure every single page validates, but if they work cross-browser that's not too much of a problem, and large corps. on the whole are starting to realise that sites have to be designed with accessibility/useability built in. _____________________________ ~~ "A cruel god ain't no god at all" ~~ (in reply to jvthundercat)


spitfire Posts: 424 Joined: 8/6/2005 Status: offline	RE: please review spam4it.com - 1/22/2006 6:28:37 As womble says, legacy sites will inevitably show validation errors. They were built before validation became the acceptable way of testing for good code practices, that provide solid, easily maintainable pages. Large sites cannot just be tweaked to validate and depending on how mal-formed the code is, it could mean a complete re-write - a bit like trying to turn a tanker around in mid-stream. But keep an eye on them, gradually they will fall due for re-writes and even some forum software can be modified to make it valid and quite accessible to all visitors. dpf pointed you towards the problem - syntax. There is a mix of XHTML and HTML syntax in the code. Dreamweaver does not get things like variable closing ">" and "/>" wrong, nor does it mix capitalised tags <A HREF> with lower case ones within the same doctype. It is most probably not the code Dreamweaver actually gave you - how can it be expected to cope with some code (pasted?) from XHTML documents and some code from HTML. The problem is trusting in Dreamweaver always to get it right, no matter what stuff appears that is not Dreamweaver generated or Dreamweaver compatible. A little test for you. Let's assume the home page started in Dreamweaver with a different doctype, say HTML 4.01 transitional. Apply that to your code instead of the XHTML 1.0 transitional it now carries. Validate - 7 errors only, instead of the 77 errors currently. Don't have nightmares now (in reply to womble)