SITE REVIEW: Conorific

  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

The rules say that if I need more feedback, I should add to my original post. I did that last week, and no one has replied, so I'm posting my new version again.

http://conorific.com/orig

I understand that the design may not appeal to all who view it, but try to look at things from an organizational and/or usage perspective.
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post 3+ Months Ago

  • panreach
  • Novice
  • Novice
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 28

Post 3+ Months Ago

looks good to me.
  • quietside
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 12
  • Loc: TAMPA, FLORIDA

Post 3+ Months Ago

OK.. from experience.. you need to ALWAYS design your site with "CONTROLS".... these controls I am mentioning is the ability for the site to interpret the size of one's browser and screen size (800x600 or 1024x768 ect.)

ALways take that in mind when building your sites....

I thought it was a cute site... A little to bright with the white... But that is ok...

If you have any questions.. let me know...

ciao

quietside :twisted:
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

panreach: I hope you're not going to try to get a site reviewed with the one you just gave me.

quietside: I wanted it sitting all the way to the left and scrolling down, that way it would fit any resolution.
  • quietside
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 12
  • Loc: TAMPA, FLORIDA

Post 3+ Months Ago

Another form is to use TABLES and center it.. so it has a fold affect if their browser is set lower than 800x600... when I dropped it down.. your site CRUMPLED.. and text shifted.....
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

This is a CSS-only layout, and that generally means no tables, since they can't be controlled by CSS very well.

I looked at my site in IE, Firefox and Opera, 800x600 and in 640x480, and nothing moved. I didn't want it to be fluid, because then it would fit the sides of the browser window.
  • Tone2k11
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • Tone2k11
  • Posts: 493
  • Loc: Southampton - UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

I like it a lot, the flower is very funky!

One question: why is the home page so long?

The colors go well together the white is bright but i think that it goes with the layout of the site.

It is kinda hard to tell what your site is about.

Sorry the review is kinda short but thats a good thing as i mostly only say the bad things and i cant think of any more to say lol.
  • quantumcloud
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 456
  • Loc: Dhaka, Bangladesh

Post 3+ Months Ago

Well, I visited the site before, now it seems, after the new version. So don't know about the old version.

The design looks different. But the main navigation could be higher up. Can't see the entire navigation without scrolling at 1024. Or did you do it intentionally, to obscure the offsite links little bit?

Most pages' tables are too tall vertically. Have a lot of unused spaces beneath the contents. Are you saving those spaces for future contents? Height defined 2100pxs and 1800 pxs! Is it really necessary to define a fixed height? Let the contents fix the size. But I guess you wanted to match the two boxes but could not do it with CSS. I also guess you hate tables so much! lol.

The links' hover color is horrendous. Pure white or anything else could be better.

Portfolio and other graphics could and should have better canvas with shadow or bevel effects. The way they are presented, along with the description, do not look very impressive. I would be glad to help you with the graphics. PM me if you would like me to.

Need more original contents onsite.

Nice, simple coding. Can't say anymore till I try and taste your recipes(though I never cook, I will ask mom). And if they turn out to be crap...all good points are void.
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

Tone2k11:It's not really a home page, it's my random rambling. No one has to read it. There's no defined purpose to my site, it's a personal site. The links on the side pretty much explain all there is to know.

quantumcloud: I sort of wanted to obscure the links a bit, yes. I hate having all the components of page right there in someone's face.

Yes, I was saving the space, because some pages are only a paragraph long, leaving white space at the bottom. Also, if you look at my clothes designs, they take up the whooooooole div. I'm working on making that more efficient now.

Someone else said the yellow hover was bad too...guess I'll be fixing that.

I don't like putting shadows and stuff on my graphics because I think it looks cheesy. I don't want to add pizzazz. Overemphasized image is all talk and no substance. With just the 1px border, I'm telling the reader, "That's my work stripped bare and devoid of complication, like it or not."

I have a whole bunch of content that hasn't been added yet due to finals and school crap.

Thank you. I pride myself on my "Nice, simple coding." Have a shot at the recipes - they're good if I do say so myself.

Thanks for everything.
  • Tone2k11
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • Tone2k11
  • Posts: 493
  • Loc: Southampton - UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

I just got the impression from the title of the page being "Home Base" that it was the home page.

Just becasue it is a personal site, does that mean that it has got to be so long?
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

Yay For no tables :)

Describe the site in one word: "quirky". Personnally I quite like it, although I can always find critisisms.

1) The page length is kinda weird. I was expecting there to be something down the bottom there, something random and odd, most likely. And there wasn't - which I suppose is random and odd in itself :lol:

2)Folowing our little discussion earlier, I would not have expected this:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http% ... ecipes.php
:wink:

3)Use the power of css and put your links <i>below</i> the bodyin the html file. It's a nice thing to do for text/aural browsers, also for supporting mobile devices.

4)You have used absolute font sizes, which is a little harsh on those with poor eyesight. Use em's or %'s instead.

Thats about it for the mo, I like the site, it has a nice atmosphere to it. I particularly like the tutorial on how to thread a needle :wink:
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

AAAAAAAAAAAAAH! Noooooooooo! rtm, you caught me! For once, I have not a bloody clue what the validator's talking about. I'll ask around, or if maybe you know...?

I'll look at the standards and change the font sizes.

"3)Use the power of css and put your links below the bodyin the html file. It's a nice thing to do for text/aural browsers, also for supporting mobile devices. " Uhh...err? What do you mean?

Well, believe it or not, at LiveJournal's t_shirt_surgery, there are people who can't thread a hand needle properly if the life of their appendages depended on it,
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

Actually, I'm not sure either.....

Um, it may have something to do with the images?? Which leads me onto another critisism. Put links into lists, cos thats what they are. Hand info on formatting lists at http://www.alistapart.com somewhere. Then use the css to put images instead of bullets.

The #3 is what it say. Using CSS you can often order your html hawever you like and then format it too suit. If someone is using a text or aural browser, they have to go through all of the links before they get to read the page contents. So, where possible, links go below the content in the html.

edit, just saw this:

Quote:
But I guess you wanted to match the two boxes but could not do it with CSS

PAH!!
regarding the heights, you may what to check out the faux columns section at alistapart as well. It is more than possible to create equal height columns using CSS. You can also check out my (beta) page with examples of the very same technique:
http://www.caffeinefuelled.net/lesson5.php

Both a list apart and my page are perfect examples of using this technique in "real" websites
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

The new and improved rtm223: now as full of info as ATNO/TW and dM.
  • quantumcloud
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 456
  • Loc: Dhaka, Bangladesh

Post 3+ Months Ago

conorific,

You are most welcome.

Quote:
I don't like putting shadows and stuff on my graphics because I think it looks cheesy. I don't want to add pizzazz. Overemphasized image is all talk and no substance. With just the 1px border, I'm telling the reader, "That's my work stripped bare and devoid of complication, like it or not."


I guess you can afford the damn care and I-will-do-as-I-wish attitude with your personal site. But this was just what I think would be good for you as opposed to what you think is kool for you. :)

Anyway, I will keep you updated on the food quality.


RTM,
Quote:
PAH!!
regarding the heights, you may what to check out the faux columns section at alistapart as well. It is more than possible to create equal height columns using CSS. You can also check out my (beta) page with examples of the very same technique:
http://www.caffeinefuelled.net/lesson5.php


Pah rtm. I doubt she can fake a background as columns in the current state of the web site. The two boxes do not start from the same height. This will need some pretty big background to get it to work. Suggest us some other tutorial.

And also both of your sites are under construction?
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

quantumcloud wrote:
The two boxes do not start from the same height. This will need some pretty big background to get it to work.

http://www.csszengarden.com/?cssfile=/0 ... css&page=1

Same texhnique, the two columns do not have to start at the same position. The flower can overlap the right column and hide it from view.....

I have no quarrel with you quantum, just don't be dissin' my beloved CSS, we have have a sordidly romatic affair and no-one shall come between us :lol: just don't tell my girlfriend.....

<b>Anything</b> you can do with tables can be done with CSS-based layouts, other than vertical centering. The only difference is that it takes a little more effort and ingenuity than tables. The extra work is more than paid off by the benefits of efficient CSS coding.

Quote:
And also both of your sites are under construction?

I have made no secret of this fact. Yes, one is waiting content from the client, who happens to be a charity - so they don't have a lot of time to write stuff up. The other I am scrapping around with a lot. It's an extremely large site and I am very anal about the content being just perfect. I will be launching that in a few days, with only half the content ready.
  • quantumcloud
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 456
  • Loc: Dhaka, Bangladesh

Post 3+ Months Ago

But of course, rtm...I have no intention to fight with you over css and tables. Did my tone get querellous? Sorry then. I was only asking info.

I use both as convenient. Any idealism, such as I must use css even when it is a round about, is meaningless to me. May be you are right, css can do most things that tables can. That is just fine with me. I will use css for things that tables cannot.

Quote:
I have made no secret of this fact. Yes, one is waiting content from the client, who happens to be a charity - so they don't have a lot of time to write stuff up. The other I am scrapping around with a lot. It's an extremely large site and I am very anal about the content being just perfect. I will be launching that in a few days, with only half the content ready.


I wanted to check your site as two column example. The new example is perfect I guess for the purpose in hand. Waiting for your site to be finished. Expecting some spectacular job. :)
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

I was just making sure that this didn't devolve into anything more then a polite conversation, as I do enjoy a good arguament :D

I wouldn't agree that CSS is an ideology. The benefits of it are flexibility, efficiency, accessibility, maintainability, SEO, device independance, neatness and possibly several other words ending in "ibility" that I have forgotten about :lol: I personally think it wins over purely on it's merits, rather than being a fad (or whatever)

I don't believe that you could show me a situation where tables would have any benefits over pure css, other than for actually tabulating things. I'm happy for anyone to try and prove me wrong though :D

Just don't expect my site to be half as purty as yours ok?
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

Dammit, rtm, I think we have a third rival in the harsh reviews department. Maybe we should band together.
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

I meant the three of us.
  • quantumcloud
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 456
  • Loc: Dhaka, Bangladesh

Post 3+ Months Ago

RTM,

Quote:
I was just making sure that this didn't devolve into anything more then a polite conversation, as I do enjoy a good arguament


Same here.


Quote:
I wouldn't agree that CSS is an ideology. The benefits of it are flexibility, efficiency, accessibility, maintainability, SEO, device independance, neatness and possibly several other words ending in "ibility" that I have forgotten about


I do not think there really is some very big difference between the two in those issues. Personally, I find tables to be much easier to lay out. But that could be just my habit. I love the CSS's ability of absolute positioning though. Tables can't beat that in many cases.


Quote:
I don't believe that you could show me a situation where tables would have any benefits over pure css, other than for actually tabulating things. I'm happy for anyone to try and prove me wrong though


The current situation with coronfic.com is a perfect example of such a thing. It'd be much much easier to accomplish two column effects with table, instead of redoing the background graphics and other div styles. Ofcourse, she can do it eventually with CSS. But using table she won't have to touch the background graphic. I'd surely go with tables in such case.

Quote:
Just don't expect my site to be half as purty as yours ok?


Nah RTM, where is your sense of challange? :wink:


Coronfic,

Quote:
Dammit, rtm, I think we have a third rival in the harsh reviews department. Maybe we should band together.


hmm...not a bad idea. Someone needs to keep an eye on you two and guide you to make sure that you are not too cruel on other poor webmasters.
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

quantumcloud wrote:
Quote:
I don't believe that you could show me a situation where tables would have any benefits over pure css, other than for actually tabulating things. I'm happy for anyone to try and prove me wrong though


The current situation with coronfic.com is a perfect example of such a thing. It'd be much much easier to accomplish two column effects with table, instead of redoing the background graphics and other div styles. Ofcourse, she can do it eventually with CSS. But using table she won't have to touch the background graphic. I'd surely go with tables in such case.

Ahh but you see, in comes the very best thing about CSS because she doesn't have <i>any inline styles</i>. So to make the necessary modifications she only needs to change two files (style.css and the image file) and the changes will occur site-wide, none of the html will need to be altered. To redo the site with tables, now that would involve altering all the pages to incorporate completely different markup. Surely that would be the difficult way to do it? :wink:

Quote:
Quote:
Just don't expect my site to be half as purty as yours ok?

Nah RTM, where is your sense of challange? :wink:


Oh I like a challenge, I'm just not dumb (well not too dumb). Your graphical work is much better than mine and there is no disputing that.
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

quantumcloud: We're not mean, we just tell the truth. And when I meant a third rival, I was referring to you.
  • quantumcloud
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 456
  • Loc: Dhaka, Bangladesh

Post 3+ Months Ago

RTM,

Quote:
Ahh but you see, in comes the very best thing about CSS because she doesn't have any inline styles. So to make the necessary modifications she only needs to change two files (style.css and the image file) and the changes will occur site-wide, none of the html will need to be altered.


If she can do it without actually touching the html of each page, I will gracefully admit the absolute supremecy of CSS.

Quote:
Oh I like a challenge, I'm just not dumb (well not too dumb). Your graphical work is much better than mine and there is no disputing that.


See I am blushing now... :oops:

Coronfic,
Quote:
We're not mean, we just tell the truth.


I absolutely understand that. And I thoroughly enjoy both of your witty comments. Not to mention the usefull leads.


Quote:
And when I meant a third rival, I was referring to you.


Well in the next message you said about banding the three of us together.
Quote:
I meant the three of us.
Now you want to throw me out of the band wagon. :(
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

Lesson: I'm not allowed to wake up and stumble to the keyboard anymore.
  • rtm223
  • Mastermind
  • Mastermind
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 1855
  • Loc: Uk

Post 3+ Months Ago

quantumcloud wrote:
If she can do it without actually touching the html of each page, I will gracefully admit the absolute supremecy of CSS.


<center>WOOHOO!!!!</center>

Yeah, the way the page is designed it is theoretically possible to do it by changing about 5 lines in the .css file. I say theoretically because it <b>may</b> need more editing than 5 lines depending on how it is now, but <i>everything</i> would be done in the CSS file.

If you go check out the beta pages of my site (which I posted earlier on this thread), you will see a stylesheet selector menu - all that does is change external stylesheets and uses php to set cookies. None of the html between the body tags changes at all. Note - I'm not at all happy with any of those layouts but the default. especially the "imageless purple" one which I have <b>not finished yet</b>, Sites with no graphics are too hard, and I really did chose a horrible color to use :( :lol:
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

Once I find a bowl in which I can eat generic Cheerios, I will work on this whole issue.
  • veryhip
  • Newbie
  • Newbie
  • veryhip
  • Posts: 11
  • Loc: Atlanta, GA

Post 3+ Months Ago

good use of alternatiing colors in the left side of the box... and good use of the alternating sizes of the lines.. i like the scheme... but the text font at the top is a little off i think... don't like the alternating uhh... how would you say?? maybe angles of the letters...
  • Tone2k11
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • Tone2k11
  • Posts: 493
  • Loc: Southampton - UK

Post 3+ Months Ago

How come with CSS you are unable to select a certain amount of text? Is this just me or is it happening to everyone? Its the same with what ever CSS site i visit, i go to select a lil bit of the text but it selects a big chunk?!
  • conorific
  • Proficient
  • Proficient
  • User avatar
  • Posts: 350
  • Loc: NY

Post 3+ Months Ago

It's not a problem for me, usually. You're special.
  • Anonymous
  • Bot
  • No Avatar
  • Posts: ?
  • Loc: Ozzuland
  • Status: Online

Post 3+ Months Ago

Post Information

  • Total Posts in this topic: 33 posts
  • Moderator: Website Reviewers
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests
  • You cannot post new topics in this forum
  • You cannot reply to topics in this forum
  • You cannot edit your posts in this forum
  • You cannot delete your posts in this forum
  • You cannot post attachments in this forum
 
 

© 1998-2014. Ozzu® is a registered trademark of Unmelted, LLC.