TPU ChatChat on IRC
Internet Relay Chat?
Java Applet client
Who's on IRC?
Posted by Psion [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 11:01:10 AM See http://home.tpu.org/~psion/tpu-new.gif
Since I don't seem to be getting ideas across to people who are working on layouts, this is the general sort of thing I've been thinking of. Looks a lot like what we have now, but I have to stress that this is not supposed to be a scale model, and I would expect that the boxes on the two sides would be a lot smaller than the middle. This is just supposed to suggest a way to set things up, leaving graphical embellishments completely up to others. I think this one manages to present the most important stuff on the first screenful of page.
Posted by DakeDesuDx [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 11:06:24 AM LOL! Can I use that as trolling material? (Not that the gif was meant for that.... :-)
Posted by Psion [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 11:27:15 AM Don't forget to behold the splendor of HTTP URL link detection I've added!
Posted by metamorphic [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 11:48:38 AM Learning to eat?
Psion fan club?
I love psion?
Posted by DakeDesuDx [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 12:28:34 PM I would put it on my own server, anyways, cause I have no idea how long it would be up on yours... (too bad the server I am currently on is one of those crappy free ones, w/ popunders) that reminds me of a complain I have...
Posted by Psion [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 12:37:15 PM At any rate, if nothing fruitful comes from self-professed web designers in the next week, then I'll start the painful process of creating this myself.
Posted by DakeDesuDx [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 12:40:32 PM I do not think learning to eat would be painful? How 'bout you gian? and having your own fan club is aways good :-)
Posted by gian [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 07:58:21 PM Yes... learning to eat is a very painful process... and I am the president of Psion's fan club ;-)
I'm going to have a go at starting to implement that in Tea templates Psion (or as much as my skills will allow =]).
Posted by taubz [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 07:59:18 PM Isn't this essentially what we have now -- my changes -- except mirrored/shifted and with the two new dynamic content boxes?
I prefer my ordering of the boxes to yours. :) News, Quick start, message boards, and main summary all need to be in the first screenful. Maybe we should link Quick starts and links off of the main page to save space.
Posted by gian [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 08:03:20 PM http://gian.expdev.net/tpu.html
It works brutha!
Posted by gian [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 08:34:20 PM Okay:
Is where I am currently working, so you can see the progress being made.
Other admins: Hands off! Make your own test page whilst I'm still working on it.
Posted by Psion [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 08:41:12 PM taubz, like I said, a lot of that text is supposed to be really small, like you see in floating side boxes on pretty much every cliched web site in existence. The graphical embellishments that make it look purdy are a major thing desired.
Posted by DakeDesuDx [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 08:59:17 PM Oh my! All those Tables scare me... please use Div/CSS? Div/CSS can make something that would be hard with Tables, and make it a rather easy process using stylesheets to position stuff, instead of the evil <layout> tag... err wait that is <table> tag (But you catch my point about using te Table tag for something it was not meant for, right?).
One site that I like (particularly because I made it :P), is located at http://www.karawachi.com/gtw/ , though there are still a couple problems to work out with NS4 (NS4 of course is the spawn or all unholyness). Though on any W3C standard browser it looks really nice (I will read the NS4 manual later, trying to correct the problem, but for every version of NS4 there seems to be a different way of displaying the site. >_<!).
The TPU layout would be made way easier to code if we did it with Div/CSS, rather than use Tables. And for the amount of data we are sending, we are prolly sending more Table markup than actual content >_<!
Posted by gian [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 09:03:29 PM NO. Div tags are not acceptable! In IE they just get pushed off the side of the screen.
And Table tags _were_ meant for formatting. You need to learn to swim in poorly formatted HTML for 5 years before you come and tell me that tables aren't a good way to position!
And NS4 does conform to W3C standards, sorry to say, and Div tags are not in HTML 3.2!
Posted by DakeDesuDx [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 09:21:51 PM Just a couple notes and questions:
1) I have never heard of div tags getting pushed of screen by any browser. In fact if your using CSS to define their properties, rather than attributes, they should work in IE 5+, cause IE5 was the first browser to support CSS1 (I can find the link if you want). If you want you can send a screenshot, showing what happens, plus the code to that happening (both the HTML file, and the CSS file)
2) Before Netscape released NS4, they claimed that they would support HTML4, not HTML3.2... I've actually read books that have to calmly explain that just cause the browser says its version X, does not mean is supports version X of HTML, they had to put that in, cause IE4, and NS4, both before they were released, both claimed to support HTML4... not HTML3.2, HTML4. I can even dig up these books at my library to quote from.
3) As for NS4 being W3C standard: No, that is just wrong. I've talked to professional web developers that confirm this. IE4 is more W3C standard than NS4, that one of the reasons why M$ won the browser war for those years. That is also one of the reasons NS launched the Mozilla project, so they can get a browser that WAS W3C standard. I have made pages that accomdate to CSS1, and HTML4, which both of those NS4 claimed to support properly, and even in the second last version before NS6 NS4.75, they did not have anything worth decent with CSS... infact a lot of stuff had been disabled in that version.
4) If your making a page to accomondate people using browsers that still use HTML32, that is a laugh. Back about six months ago, I had the W3C standard HTML32 browser Arena, made by, guess who, W3C, which could not display any table worth the packets they were sent in. I really wanted to upgrade that browser, and that is also one of the reasons I cannot stand RHL5.
The current version of HTML is actaully XHTML1.1 (which IS a recommendation) and that would make HTML32 three full versions old (Full versions, not counting minor releases). Microsoft does not give tech support for products more than two upgrades old(well you can get it... just its REALLY expensive) and neither do most sane companies.
Posted by gian [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 09:45:48 PM I was simply stating it for accuracy. The current pages does use XHTML, but under current development circumstances (ie. Frontpage) I can't go to the effort of using div tags. Later I will incorperate them, as we already have CSS classes defined for the divs.
Posted by DakeDesuDx [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 09:49:26 PM You can use FrontPage for Tea layouts? >_<...
I guess my only problem with that is I am completely against WYSI(not)WYG, try to find a Text based HTML editor with syntax highlighting... that is what is normally suggested by people in the know...
Unless you just being Lazy, then by all means, be lazy... we've all been known to edo that :-)
Posted by gian [send private reply] at January 02, 2002, 10:02:38 PM Dake, I have been hand coding HTML since I was 7... give me a little credit.
There was once a time when WYSIWYG editors were cheap and crap, and never worked, but I believe that they are now at a standard where they can produce something quite admirible. I still hand code portions of it that frontpage doesn't get right, and all is happy... the result is (usually)valid HTML.
And you can use frontpage for Tea templates, all the code is encapsulated in <% %> tags, so frontpage just ignores them as though they were asp... :-)
Posted by metamorphic [send private reply] at January 03, 2002, 09:02:34 AM >> Dake, I have been hand coding HTML since I was 7... give me a little credit.
Ditto, well not quite. Ive been coding it for 5 years and im 17 so when i was 12. Dont know how old you are.
Also i *still* use a text editor called HTML kit very good HTML editing software. like notpad but with loads of time saving features and code coloring ect.
Posted by gian [send private reply] at January 03, 2002, 06:12:33 PM Yes, well... well done. Unfortunately, I don't have the luxury of time, and I prefer to spend the time I do have programming, not refusing to use a wysiwyg editor simply on the basis of principles.
Oh, and by the way, it's simply a preference thing these days as to whether or not you use a wysiwyg editor or not, because the results are the same. But it is easy(or easier) to get things wrong whilst hand coding...
Posted by DakeDesuDx [send private reply] at January 07, 2002, 01:48:42 PM To each, his or her own...
That is all I am going to say...
Register as a new user