Search results

sdesign1, I was, until the last few days in the same camp as you. Then, I saw this article by Chris Coyier, and I think I may be a convert. What really got me wanting to make the change was the thought of how much time I spend mocking up my designs only to turn around and code them later. And...

Yes, it is

Being Air Force myself, I can tell you that you should be able to find exactly what you're allowed to do on the website in question. Most of those websites have a page that explains it all. IIRC, AFIs, AFMANs, etc are free to use as references, but to be safe, contact them here to be sure.

How big are we talking. I did an "every page" slider here (on the right. There'll be more pages once the client finally gets around to adding them), and it doesn't seem to be a problem, mostly because it's small and out of the way.

Take a look at CushyCMS. You basically just drop a class areas you want editable, and it lets them update as needed. There is no good one-click conversion for CMS templates that I'm aware of, though turning a static page into one isn't all that hard.

The menu font looks out of place and is hard on the eyes. The middle section feels a bit text heavy, even though there isn't that much text. I think this may be due to the weight/size of the font. Also, the 4 columns don't have a solid separation (perhaps graphically or white space). You have...

Again, do this

Or if you do, push off the temptation of using design view. In all seriousness, if you haven't yet spent money on Dw, don't. If you're serious about coding the site yourself, Dw doesn't offer anything you can't get for free. Coding the template is pretty simple if you know and understand...

Ditto.....

1. That is the most likely option, but there are others. 2. Let the dev worry about that, but it'll likely be mySQL. 3. Vice versa 4. I would recommend a firm to do this. They'll have both sides of the coin staffed. You'll pay out a bit more, but likely get a better product sooner. One person...

I don't know too much about Weebly, but I would look at the CSS for the surrounding elements and see if there's a margin set on them. Also, there may be a margin set on the ad itself. If you post a link, I can take a look at your code and tell you more.

That'll be in your CSS, likely a margin setting. If you're scratching your head right now, just post a link so we can take a look at your code, and someone will tell you what to do.

The idea is to use it for content that is part of the display. Sounds like an oxymoron, but it isn't. In your example, if you're "styling" a level 2 header with the label "Header 2", then it would be a valid usage. Also, consider this example site I made some time ago...

You aren't entirely wrong on your point. Remember, though that also under the idea of semantics that content, display and interaction should be separated. Image maps don't separate content and display. In fact, they put both content and display in HTML and make interaction much more difficult...

Methinks we may have actually found a valid use for a WYSIWYG editor. I didn't such a thing existed, but this might be it...

Can we make the logo bigger? It needs to be more "Web 2.0". My wife doesn't like it... Wait, sorry, jumping ahead. ;)

You're still calling IE6 twice. Try [if !IE 6] which basically says "if NOT IE 6"

Inkscape isn't an alternative to Photoshop. Now Illustrator, on the other hand... Photoshop CS4 is perfectly adequate. The only thing CS5 has that CS4 doesn't (that I'm aware of) is content aware, which wasn't very well implemented any way.

Paint.NET is pretty good. I used it for a while. I like it way better than GIMP. In fact, I can't stand GIMP. Photoshop is definitely better. Fireworks is better still, but Paint.NET is really good and perfectly adequate for just starting out.

LOL. That's pretty funny. One article's date just shows up as "pre 2006" and the other 2 are about using CSS to replace image maps, including the ALA article from 2003!. So, I guess maybe not 1997, but grossly out of date for sure. EDIT: Upon reading the "pre 2006" article further, it's also...