Page 1 of 2

I'm proud of myself

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:12 pm
by Luke
Because I made my first xhtml and css complient site. It only took like 4 hours to convert the whole site to xhtml.

http://www.sierra-tech.com

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 1:27 pm
by shiznatix
nice site. congrats on it all. actually looks like a good client too. impressive

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:20 pm
by Grim...
That Frontpage is improving, huh?

Okay, okay, I'll stop it now...

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:39 pm
by foobar
Respect! It validates fine for XHTML Transitional... [link].

Nice site too and good service. If you were anywhere close to me, I'd probably nag you about my hardware problems every once in a while. :wink: I'm hopeless when it comes to anything beyond assembling a computer and the basic cable-plugging stuff.

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:58 pm
by Luke
foobar wrote:Respect! It validates fine for XHTML Transitional... [link].

Nice site too and good service. If you were anywhere close to me, I'd probably nag you about my hardware problems every once in a while. :wink: I'm hopeless when it comes to anything beyond assembling a computer and the basic cable-plugging stuff.
Oh, I'm the same way man! haha I just made the site.

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:05 pm
by Luke
Should I post the XHTML and CSS complient logos on my site? Is that in bad taste? opinions?

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:08 pm
by foobar
The Ninja Space Goat wrote:Should I post the XHTML and CSS complient logos on my site? Is that in bad taste? opinions?
You should! It's not in bad tase at all. Everybody brags about their great XHTML nowadays anyway.

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:16 pm
by Ambush Commander
I don't do it simply because I want to keep page load size as small as possible, and an extra image is... erm... well unnecessary. Not necessarily because of bad taste though.

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:18 pm
by foobar
[edit] forget it, wrong person... :oops:

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:19 pm
by Ambush Commander
Personal preference. It may not always be applicable elsewhere, I guess.

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:23 pm
by John Cartwright
The site in his profile doesn't? To what were you refering?

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 3:26 pm
by Ambush Commander
He thought I was Ninja Space Goat. I was confused too, so I figured that he was asking why an extra image would hurt on a site already dependant on images. I said, "not much"

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 6:01 pm
by Luke
yea it has too many images as it is I guess. thanks guys.

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 6:32 pm
by Luke

Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 10:44 pm
by mickd
the first site you posted never loads for me. tried it awhile ago too and only had errors on it (30 second exceeded on line 2 on 1 of the scripts) :(

it is just loading slow? because if it didnt load after 10 seconds normally i close it.