Today the Hobbyist, Tommorow, The World!

[nick]

Deewiant wrote:
>> nick wrote:
>>> Yeah, I can see that the big D is getting no love at all.

> It'll probably involve more tables to get this done well enough, but I suggest
> moving it to the top of the sidebar currently at the left...
Probably no tables... I'll give it a shot.

> Also, I'd suggest an <img> tag with alt text instead of a background image as it
> currently is: with images off, or a browser that doesn't show them at all,
> there's nothing at the top of the page remotely resembling a header.
I can make an alt tag apply to something else, but I wanted to leave
that image configurable via CSS (as is common practice these days).

> <nitpick>
> Your HTML doesn't validate: if you're going to specify a doctype why not conform
> to it? Might as well leave it out unless you're going to fix it.
Not useless, the doctype signals IE to fix its box model. However, your
point is well taken. I coded it by hand, and never did validate it.
Thanks for the reminder.

> I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think you need those &nbsp; entities in the
> banner and sash divs.
Browser compatibility, they are needed.

> If you can, move the header's HTML code to the bottom of the file: in a
> text-only browser, it's annoying to have to skip past the menu on every page.
> Then you can make a "skip to menu" link which is hidden with display: none (off
> the top of my head... I _think_ Lynx & co. display such anyway, but I'm not
> sure... it might be some other attribute, but it can be done).
I'll see what I can do with a reasonable trade-off between time spent
tweaking html/css and productivity.

> Other than that, the layout's quite good. <g>

Thank you for the constructive criticism.