phpwcms Support Forum

Petfood site for my friend - not ready yet.

Comments?

Nice one ... but the Background Image shouldn't repeat... on my big screen it's displayed nearly two times....

Thanks.. Did not notice that. I will check the background. Not sure if we are going to keep it anyway.

Thank You for comment!

You're welcome

Hi Lumimies,

do you think the big background-picture
is really necessary? Same as the coloured
blocls on the page´s bottom and on the left.

For me it disturbs the visiual peace of the page.
I like the imagerotator very much. Great photos.
Maybe you can switch the background picture
to a fuzzy and or just grey background picture.

Or (stolen from fulvio):
Completeness is reached through subtraction, not through addition

Only my opinion The rest is great


lars

Hi!

Yeah... I was not sure about that (background) either.. But the client said that they like it, so... Customer is the King..

Thanks for comments!

Hi Lumimies,

I am delighted to see your good side technology.

Very good photographies.

The background image isn´t deep enough by using 1280x1024.

I would prefere to cut the horz. Navigation to one level deep - without any flyout. Than you can eleminate the entry body { behavior: url("phpwcms_template/inc_css/specific/csshover2.htc"); } at conf.inc.php
($phpwcms['IE_htc_hover'] = 0; )

This damn pop-up menu don´t work in all browsers right.

Regards Knut

flip-flop wrote: The background image isn´t deep enough by using 1280x1024.

You meant 1600 x 1280, right!?

Klappstuhl wrote:You meant 1600 x 1280, right!?

No, I mean 1280x1024.


Knut

flip-flop wrote:Hi Lumimies,

I am delighted to see your good side technology.

Well... As You can see the site technology belongs to You...

(And for everybody - this site is based on flip-flop`s template "http://www.128.weitzelmedia.de/index.php?install_tmpl7")

This template was the first I could find and modify without any pain. It is commented great and easy to modify.

So - Credits go to flip-flop after the site is ready and rolling.

Thank You Flip-Flop!

Lumimies

Lumimies wrote:This template was the first I could find and modify without any pain. It is commented great and easy to modify.

This template is made for people with basic css knowledge. It isn´t the easyest one because the following conditions should be comply:
------------------
- Any column may be longest.
- All the columns are floated.
- This layout works in: IE5+IE6/7/Win, Opera 6+,
Mozilla, IE5/Mac, Safari.
- You can format every column separately.
------------------
The basic source is comming from Bruno Fassino You can read it at the first comment in the css file.

Your site:
--------------------------------------------------------
I if you have time I think you can switch the horiz. and vert. navigation to NAV_LIST_UL: http://www.phpwcms.de/forum/viewtopic.php?p=74552
You don´t need the special navigation NAV_LIST_ALL_DIV for this site.
It is only (since some days enhanced) for very special menus like a site from you in the "end of 2005". (enhanced to parent link/text, structure depth, ID ouput, ...) [Thanks for the enhanced basic work to "marcus@localhost"].

I hope O.G. will implement this "parent feature" into the NAV_LIST_UL.

Thanks for the flowers

Knut

Yeppp..

I if you have time I think you can switch the horiz. and vert. navigation to NAV_LIST_UL

Do You think that NAV_LIST_UL works better in this case? Or has better performance?

Cheers

Lumimies

Do You think that NAV_LIST_UL works better in this case? Or has better performance?

It doesn´t work better, it is the same. (But there is a bug in the css-file at this moment for IE7 ore MAC output using NAV_LIST_UL in vert. case).

Performance: I don´t know about this.
There is a little bit less running code but I can´t determan a real performance difference.

I think it is more homogenous.

Regards

Knut

Ok. Thank You!

flip-flop wrote:

Klappstuhl wrote:You meant 1600 x 1280, right!?

No, I mean 1280x1024.


Knut

you mean

Nordlicht wrote:

flip-flop wrote: The background image isn´t deep enough by using 1280x1024.

You meant 1600 x 1280, right!?