I set up a small website since I did not like how the posting got formatted on this and other forums. If you go you will see that there will be quite a bit on there eventually (hopefully not, hopefully people will buy it form me!)
Anyway opinions of the site, ease of navigation, appearance, etc would be appreciated.
Oh and buy something!
formatting link
Didn't find your answer? Ask the community — no account required.
M
Mad-Modeller
Looks good to me, Frank. I did notice that some of the type ran together which I assume is endemic to databases.
Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.
G
Gray Ghost
Mad-Modeller wrote in news:8O-dnX0O5 _lNTjnUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@dejazzd.com:
Thanks. Where did you see the run together? Because I have crappy eyesight I set things on my screen large and distinct. I have to dial it back to 1024 x
768 for testing but haven't noticed anything odd, yet.
Frank
W
willshak
on 2/25/2009 12:30 AM (ET) Gray Ghost wrote the following:
The site does not work well with Firefox. It does work in IE.
G
Gray Ghost
willshak wrote in news:h_Gdnc0qvdZd3jjUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@supernews.com:
What does it do in Firefox?
J
John McGrail
It was not obvious to me that the main page was links. So at first I thought the page was devoid of a list of things to sell and moved on.
This morning I went back again and just started clicking on text in the table (like Models).
I'd suggest picking a different background color for the main page, or forcing a contrasting color for not yet visited hyperlinks. The default is blue and very close to the background color.
G
Gray Ghost
John McGrail wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@spearmint.skaterat.net:
Fixed that. I've been in the business a long time. I hate white backgrounds, but I thibk it's becuase of poor eyesight. I've always liked dark background with lighter text. Doesn't work as well on the web, though.
G
Gernot Hassenpflug
It seems the table fields are fixed width or else the calcualation is badly off. Certainly, in my case, the contents overflow into the next column often enough and far enough to make the whole thing entirely illegible.
W
willshak
on 2/25/2009 10:31 AM (ET) Gray Ghost wrote the following:
See in alt.binaries.models.scale addressed to you.
E
eyeball
ditto for me.
S
someone
1/24 aircraft are a nightmare. you can make them look so real that they SHOULD be able to fly. you can detail endlessly and spend many months on one. i remember a stuka that i worked on forever. it was awesome. the nightmare? sfter 3 months of moving it all around the house, i had to admit there was no place to keep it. it dominated any room it was in and totaly made any decor pointless. it now hangs from the ceiling at a eagle's club in another state. i was given another 1/24 scale kit. i lucked out and traded it to a friend. it remains unbuilt.
M
Mad-Modeller
I believe most of them happened in the 1/24th kits. Am I correct in remembering a 1/24th Harrier?
Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.
F
Ferd Berfel
I built exactly one 1/32nd kit and found them not nearly as much fun as
1/72nd stuff. It was a small craft by most standards (Bf 109G) but it took up a big space. I was happy to find that one a new home. The other kits in that scale were traded off long ago.
Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.
G
Gray Ghost
willshak wrote in news:47GdnYjjJu0reDjUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@supernews.com:
Will, you da man. From what you sent I was able to determine that for reasons unknown Firefox was not correctly interpeting my lists, there was a hidden column used only for sorting and for whatever reason Firefox could not tell it was hidden. Actually I think it was displaying the text but not the cell itself.
In any case I have a fix for now.
THANK YOU EVERYBODY!!
Please go back and find something you can't live without!!
Frank
W
willshak
on 2/26/2009 4:03 AM (ET) Gray Ghost wrote the following:
Validate your HTML here:
formatting link
already did and you have errors.
E
eyeball
1280x800 no tinkering, with Firefox 3. And it's fine today (except needs more 1/72!)
G
Gray Ghost
eyeball wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@e5g2000vbe.googlegroups.com:
Yee-haa! I stayed up late last night to figger it out. Apparently succesfully.
More 1/72 is coming, hang in there.
G
Gray Ghost
willshak wrote in news:-q2dnXfhULl1OTvUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@supernews.com:
Harumph. Actually the pages I did have just a few errors, mostly as I am missing some declarations which apparenly aren't fatal.
The generated documents have over 500 errors. Hmm?
It displays OK now. So I'm happy.
I'll keep that URL, though, thanks.
Frank
G
Gernot Hassenpflug
Hi, first of all, in web design the designer doesn't get to specify the font. The user gets to specify it. That means that unless the designer has a lit of fonts, with the last in the list being something like "serif" or "sans" which are reconized as the system defaults on any modern browser, the font spec is worthless: it is supposed to be a list of recommendations with a fall-back.
Second, Arial 10 Bold is not likely to be on every machine. Probably only Microsoft Windows, and only if people still haven't removed it or replaced it. Third, specifying font size is another big no-no. First, it doesn't serve as an order, because the user's browser controls the view, and secondly, if the designer then bases the rest of the page layout on that font size (i.e., "eye-check" that everything is OK) everything falls apart if the user's browser selects a different font. The user is also always free to specify his or her own stylesheet to view the designer's page!
A page design should be as far as possible free from visual formatting specifications. Once the logical formatting has been done (the goal of HTML) a CSS stylesheet may be used to give suggestions (if the user's browser understands CSS, and if the user chooses to accept that stylesheet).
See above.
Yuk! You exported this from Word?!? LOL I bet the table is complete crap: try to remove formatting and leave only the bare table info inside the table tags:
Header row column 1 title ....
contents row column 1 data ....
Cheers, Gernot
G
Gernot Hassenpflug
I had to build some 1/32 kits for a club display a few years ago (before marriage, harrumph! LOL) and ended up with a Bf109E, F6F-3 and P-51D. All turned out quite nicely and I had good fun with them. The only hassle was transporting them in boxes, and of course the amount of paint it took! I remember that was my last attempt to work with the Gunze Sangyo water-based acrylics. I don't think the blue on that Hellcat ever really dried!
Join the Discussion
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Didn't find your answer?
Ask the community — no account required
Report Content
You are reporting this content to the moderators. They will look at it
ASAP.