View Full Version : Almost ready to commit

March 17th, 2004, 04:02
Almost ready to finish converting my site and roll out the new version.
But I am stuck on something.

I can't decide wether to stream the articles and reviews one after another, with some parts sharing the same page, or to just let them (in some cases) leave large amounts of blank space.

I personally think, having a more seamless look would appeal to people instead of blank space, especially in lower resolutions, where more scrolling tends to occur.

I'd tack on an extra screenshot slot as well (6 instead of 5) and split them up where the new review begins. i.e Say I have a review that takes half a page.. Well, 3 shots for that review, then 3 more shots for the new review starting below it.. etc.

What say you ?

March 23rd, 2004, 21:37

Here is a sneak peak at what it will all look like.

The only correctly functioning menu item inside the issue, is for Metroid.

You will have to manually flip the pages.


I just finished the entire NES section today, and have not bug fixed the majority of the pages for IE.

Please use Mozilla Firefox to form an opinion.. kthxbye

March 23rd, 2004, 21:58
I like what you did so far but you also need to take a look at this: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://t...dskoolgames.com (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://test.oldskoolgames.com)

You are two errors away from a standard compliant website :)

Are you planning a PDF version?

Jet Set Willy
March 23rd, 2004, 22:10
I suggest not using XHTML anyway, it's a well-meaning standard, but there are issues:


March 23rd, 2004, 22:15
An off topic question. I saw that you use php files Neco. Do you happen to use some kind of content management system as a backend?

March 23rd, 2004, 23:25
I do not use a content management system at all.

I hand coded the templates for the site in Dreamweaver, and use dreamweaver template functions to create each new page.
I prefer this method as it still provides reasonable workload turnout, with a level of control I enjoy. I have never used a CMS.
I tried several and did not feel like modifying them to suit my needs.

The only major script on my site is Cute News.

I have no plans for a PDF version at this time. I have no experience with PDF creation, or the actual software itself.

I don't know how those errors showed up. I had things working fine before, so I'll have to dig into it and fix them. I've worked very hard to maintain XHTML strict compliance thus far.


I skimmed the article, but I'm not sure it will ever effect me. Being that I never have an intention to serve my XHTML as an application. If there is something specific I was meant to have seen, you'd probably do better flat out telling me.

There is a lot of talk about tag soup.. Isn't that a term for tags the browser does not recognize ? I have no custom tags defined. They are all common knowledge tags, and some with modified properties (through CSS)

March 23rd, 2004, 23:36
If you want a news script that I developed just send me a PM. It works just like this (http://forums.oldskoolgames.com/ssi.php?a=news) but unlike that it is completely standalone, it shares no common files with the forum.

March 23rd, 2004, 23:39
I've no real need for the function. Cute news does exactly what I need it to do, which is why I chose it.

As for the two validation errors. Its likely because the standard was updated. I know that it -did- validate before.

I'm going to use a javascript work around

March 23rd, 2004, 23:41
Ok. If you ever need it just tell me.

March 23rd, 2004, 23:53
The site now validates.

(CSS will never validate 100% because of some Javascript to fix IE problems, but otherwise IS valid)

I am pleased.

March 23rd, 2004, 23:55
Tell me about it. I have to use several things that break the standard just to make things work at IE.

March 24th, 2004, 01:21
Version 3 looked the nicest. I don't really like the colours you're
using gray can look nice, but in most cases it just looks dull.

March 24th, 2004, 02:20
V3 was blue/white/red wasn't it ?

I just found it to be too hard on the eyes.

I chose to go with darker colors, because they are more neutral and easier to read against.

March 25th, 2004, 14:46
Welp. Its all live now. Going smooth too. Very pleased

March 25th, 2004, 19:04
i dont know about the cover of the magazine...it kinda looks...shitty? all fuzzy and unclear and pixely. i guess those are the consequences for enlarging small pictures

EDIT: the background of the cover looks rather bad, but i like the layout of everything else

March 25th, 2004, 20:59
It's supposed to look that way