UBB.Developers Forums General Discussion Chit Chat Comments, suggestions, hate-mail...

Just thought I'd get everyone's .01 on my new site. (It's down from .02 to .01 due to the current state of the stock market.) Anyways, URLs below:

site: KeeperZone dot Net

forum: Forum

note: i just put the forum up tonight, so it's nowhere near being done.

It doesn't render properly in Netscape... not by a longshot. I suggest you run it through the W3C HTML Validator

Other than that - the header for the main page is much too large at 215 pixels. Remember, people are going to be viewing your site that can ONLY see 350 vertical pixels at a time...

[ February 11, 2001: Message edited by: Charles Capps ]

I like the color scheme Matt, nice layout as well, tho I am in some agreement with Charles, it still has a little "Big Chief Tablet" ("over-sized" for anyone who comes from a "Generation 'some letter'" ;)) feel to it... just my opinion... I didn't check in NS.

I'm drunk..

Too big for my resolution.. which might be 1064 x768, but since I'm drunk, I could be wrong..

Anyone ever play drinking Jenga? It's like Jenga, but you write forfeits on all the pieces, hence the drunkeness.. At least I can still post like a semi-moron though.. I'd be really distraught if I couldn't type at all..

I mean, how much would that suck, to be a really bad typer, and dumb, and sober all at once..

Good job I'm not any of those..

*wanders off to talk to cucumber again*

And here was me thinking you were drunk whenever you posted

Just a thought

Since she's drunk (officially), i think her locaton is right.

Ouch Cal, that one stung..

I'm always insane, just not always drunk..

MM, you mean neverneverland?

You know, I only vaguely remember posting that last night..

*wanders off to see what else she did whilst drunk - besides eating the cucumber*

that validator is **** . it says, and i quote, "Error: end tag for element "HTML" which is not open". it was referring to my tag at the end of the document. i can't believe how innacurate it is, seeing as how there's a tag at the beginning of the page.

you do have a good point about the header, though.

the censored word is cr@p, btw...not what you might've thought.

finally - a site dedicated to us nutters who get blamed for the goals and shout at the defence (read: goalkeepers). anyways, if you need any help with the site (contents or graphics/design wise) be sure to let me help, i am sure mastermind will gimme a recomendation for my graphics(especially after i show him his new sig). anyways, just ask if you need any help...

help with content sure would be nice, i'll PM ya later today about it. thanks for the offer.

That's because you have TWO tags, man.

what do you take me for? an idiot? there's only one tag, along with only one tag, which means that there's something wrong with the validation service. i ran it through HomeSite's validator a million times, and it came out fine.

You do have 2 tags in there, one is about 1/3 the way from the bottom...

[edit]

here is the code around it:

[/edit]

[ February 12, 2001: Message edited by: AllenAyres ]

That validator is pretty stupid though, it gives you freakin' error if you don't have a width, height, and alt tag on EVERY image.

Uh, yes, as they're required by the official HTML specs.

Welcome to the REAL world.

something very odd is going on now, because i just searched through my source about 10 times, then i searched through my view source from IE about 10 times, and i still only found the two tags that i put in there.

then, i looked through it by hand, and i still found only the two tags that i wanted in there. Allen, what browser are you using...although i should think that it wouldn't make a difference.

here's the complete source:
View My Source

Using IE 5.5 on Win2K (which prints your text file as html ;)).

Here is what I get on "view source": https://ubbdev.com/keeperzone.txt

Line 195 contains

i must be losing my mind! when i view source using IE5.5 on my Win2K box, it comes out like i wrote it, with only one ending HTML tag. so, just for the heck of it, i fired up my old Win98SE box with IE 4.0, and it came out the same way.

when i looked at the file you uploaded, i noticed that my poll script was causing it, so i'm gonna have to fix it.

i feel i should apologize to Charles and Allen for biting their heads off over it thanks for the help, guys.

btw, anyone know why NS handles absolute positioning of CSS2 DIV tags so poorly?? i checked the site on an iMac at work today with NS4.7, and i was almost ashamed at myself for how bad it looks.

but, Charles said that it looks bad w/NS6, even though NS6 supposedly supports the W3C CSS2 and HTML4 standards. if NS6 fully supports CSS2 and HTML4.0, then there shouldn't be any problems with the positioning.

why does NS have to make everything so difficult?!

Recommend that in future, you use opera 5 when you design pages.. saves you a hell of a lot of headaches, since it has no proprietary tags, works exactly to HTML specs, and if it works and looks good in opera, should do the same in both other browsers too..

Actually, I said Netscape... I meant 4.x. I always refer to NS6 as Mozilla, as they are one and the same. I don't use Mozilla as my primary browser, and probably won't until it reaches 1.0.

NS4 has a comparatively poor rendering engine...

Think of Netscape like the UBB. All versions up to the most recent were based on each other. 2 was based on 1. 3 was based on 2. 4 was based on 3... And in both cases, that was all thrown out and a better product is emerging.

Something I have been working with the last couple of days: http://www.webreview.com/style/css1/charts/mastergrid.shtml

Large page, but very worth it. Shows Style Sheet handling by NS,IE, and Opera in all recent versions, pc and mac.

Damn, that's cool Allen..