MegaGlest Forum

Archives (read only) => Vanilla Glest => General discussion => Topic started by: xzalion on 13 July 2010, 10:02:06

Title: Success!!!
Post by: xzalion on 13 July 2010, 10:02:06
Hey all.

Here is my site http://eaglelore.com/ it's still not ready yet!  But it will be soon,  Hope you enjoy it.

Cheers

Xzalion
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: wyvern on 13 July 2010, 14:06:09
Sweet ;D ;D :thumbup: :thumbup:
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: xzalion on 13 July 2010, 14:37:00
Quote from: Wyvern on 13 July 2010, 14:06:09
Sweet ;D ;D :thumbup: :thumbup:

Thanks.  in the few weeks ahead! i plan just to make a new section just for Glest ... How cool is that  :O
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: wyvern on 13 July 2010, 15:23:34
GREAT!!!! :O Glest advertisements always good :thumbup: :thumbup: ;D ;D
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: ElimiNator on 13 July 2010, 16:12:20
Great but the sight is king of big. I have to scroll over to see the whole button.
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: wyvern on 13 July 2010, 16:17:13
true but still cool
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: xzalion on 13 July 2010, 16:21:05
Quote from: ElimiNator on 13 July 2010, 16:12:20
Great but the sight is king of big. I have to scroll over to see the whole button.

Everything today is big!!! :O
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: wyvern on 13 July 2010, 16:30:13
VERY BIG :O :O :O :O :O :O
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: xzalion on 13 July 2010, 16:37:54
Quote from: Wyvern on 13 July 2010, 16:30:13
VERY BIG :O :O :O :O :O :O

The main issue is!  I own a Samsung 22 wide screen!  & my site was made on that!  People with a small screen must scroll to see more stuff on the site ... Which is not a train smash!  We live in 2010 right?  if so  please guys please  upgrade to modern tech!   You don't know what you miss  :O   :O   :O   :O
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: -Archmage- on 13 July 2010, 16:52:52
Yah guys, I'm tired of seeing these tiny little websites just because someone might have a small monitor. :|
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: xzalion on 13 July 2010, 17:31:53
Quote from: -Archmage- on 13 July 2010, 16:52:52
Yah guys, I'm tired of seeing these tiny little websites just because someone might have a small monitor. :|

I'll soon  will make my site more functional!   Just busy with the Tag sections.  Once Done i'll add Glest
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: ultifd on 13 July 2010, 18:08:15
Congratulations!
Try to think of others who don't have a widescreen...monitor. Make it option able or something at least.  :|
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: xzalion on 13 July 2010, 19:01:47
Quote from: ultifd on 13 July 2010, 18:08:15
Congratulations!
Try to think of others who don't have a widescreen...monitor. Make it option able or something at least.  :|

I would love to!  but i can't  :(
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: John.d.h on 13 July 2010, 21:25:35
It shouldn't be that hard to apply a liquid or gel layout.  I understand if you've got more pressing matters, though.
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: xzalion on 13 July 2010, 22:47:27
Quote from: John.d.h on 13 July 2010, 21:25:35
It shouldn't be that hard to apply a liquid or gel layout.  I understand if you've got more pressing matters, though.

I've been working my ass off!  Here is the re mod web for your screens!  hope this one works better! http://eaglelore.com/
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: Omega on 14 July 2010, 02:08:59
The whole thing is huge images for backgrounds... Bad idea my friend. Let me give you a few web design pointers:


But hey, its a start. Happy, er, designing.
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: xzalion on 14 July 2010, 06:57:41
OK
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: Gabbe on 27 July 2010, 16:07:55
Now the website is small....you updated=?
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: Omega on 28 July 2010, 01:57:52
Not bad. It's a bit better than before, though still in need of actual info.

I would actually not recommend a visit counter, because (1) they can be very easily faked, (2) are inaccurate, I refreshed the page 5 times to get counted more :D, and (3) they are more amateurish (you'll never see a professional site with one. They are usually restricted to blog posts, family sites, and my high school teachers. :P

Also, have you looked at how messy this is?

WC3 HTML Validator Failed: 10 errors, 1 warning (http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A%2F%2Feaglelore.com%2Fpage2.html)
I hate to say it, but your "Serif WebPlus Starter Edition" failed. Badly.
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: Gabbe on 28 July 2010, 11:02:08
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=runescape.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&verbose=1&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.1 (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=runescape.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&verbose=1&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.1)

ur sure this is accurate -.-?

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=google.no&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&verbose=1&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.1 (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=google.no&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&verbose=1&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.1)

no it can`t be?

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=youtube.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&verbose=1&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.1

and look how many the official bank site of Norway has..

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=banken.no&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&verbose=1&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.1

here is glest...

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fglest.com%2F&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&verbose=1&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.1

the forum? not safe either..

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fglest.org%2Fglest_board%2Findex.php&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&verbose=1&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.1

lets try norton... nope!

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=norton.com&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&verbose=1&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.1
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: Omega on 29 July 2010, 03:03:08
I can guarentee you it is accurate Gabbe. Why can I guartentee this? Because WC3 CREATED HTML. They are the head honchos, the top of the food chain. Of course, they are also very strict. Let me explain part of it with using google.com as an example:

The first note is that google checks for HTML 5 compatibilities, which is currently a very new reign (which I am having fun learning), supported only by firefox and webkit browsers such as safari, each only to some degree. NO browser has it completely implimented, so WC3 notes the user of that.

The first error is about encoding type. Google checks for your browser and operating systems when you use the site, so it can deliver accurate character sets. Of course, this is not a universal character set, and is really meant for windows, since it is NOT a standardized (notice it's not an iso) charset, thus WC3 raises a flag.

Secondly, because google is using strict syntax in HTML 5, the table tag and all its child tags (td, tr, th) are technically depreciated, in favour of moving to div tags with CSS. Most people, me included, have not fully made this transition. The main downside to table tags that provoked them to move away from them is that a web browser must read the entire table tag (all the way to its closing tag) and cannot render anything until it has the entire table (because even a slight change in the very last tr tag can affect the whole table). Tables actually have to be read through twice, once for the tags and once to render the data. CSS is a lot harder and more complex coding, but allows linear rendering. Of course, table tags are slightly more compatible, since VERY old browsers do not support CSS well.

There's also various attributes that google uses, presumably for compatiblity (as I said, older browsers cannot use CSS that well), such as bgcolor, which are best done as a css style (either as a class/id and referencing that in an external CSS, using an entire tag in an external CSS, or by means of the style attribute). For example, an inline css tag for bgcolor would be style="background-color: #fff".

Another common error is that Google frequently links to links with GET values (everything after the ? is really a variable, with the variable name on one side of the equal sign, and the variable data on the other, then with the & sign separating variables. Of course, this was ONLY originally meant for forms, so when sites use those variables, such as for a CGI or PHP script to read (this is how they store your search data), so google raises a flag there. Instead, & signs that appear normally in the text are used to make special symbols, such as &lt; being '<'. Fortunately, links are not affected by these symbols, so it is fine to use them for this, and with common place techniques such as URL redirects with PHP/CGI scripts using these variables, its not a huge deal.

Lastly, for some reason, google does not close its script tag at the end of the file. Most likely this was negelected, purposely (because of server generated data) or accidently because of a overlook by the coder. That's actually one of the biggest errors on the page, but most, if not all, browsers detect and fix this client side, though it is still bad coding.


Now, many sites use "bad" coding practice because the new standards are either more difficult to use or aren't so well on very old browsers. So what is an example of a good site? Check the index of the forum board! There is ONE error and that is totally my fault (I forgot the type attribute when I made some javascript for the automatically updating clock in the top right corner of the theme, and will have to fix this for the next version in order to maintain the XHTML logo at the very bottom of the page (this logo shows we passed this verification)).

Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: Gabbe on 29 July 2010, 16:16:55
 :thumbup:
Title: Re: Success!!!
Post by: ultifd on 10 August 2010, 07:17:27
Hmm, xzalion, are you updating the site right now? All there is right now is...not much.
(click to show/hide)