The thing about my latest template is that I didn't want to make it insanely customizable like my last one. So instead of having text they can change, I made an image the title of the site. To edit that would be to ruin the effect. I love the colorings on it and I wrote a lot about it on my journal thing along with some other stuff. And yes, it's available for download! And yes, it's XHTML 1.1(still checking out XHTML 2!)/CSS valid! Anyways, comment, criticize, utterly shred to pieces and then mercifully tape together - your choice EDIT: Changed HTML to BBCode

Reply

i say both of them are pretty cool and the cool got the warm/cool sensation to them.

but i havn't heard to much on xhtml 2, they still havn't done the rest to 1.1 yet, to my knowledge at least.

Reply

Not bad. But, since you're going with a vectorized look, JPGs isnt the good way to go for the images. Since it's all just plain colors, GIFs would have been the better way of doing it.

Reply

I think this new template you have looks excellent. I really like the style and the colors. Everything seems to go quite well. Perhaps you intended for this to occur, or perhaps not, but the clouds don't seem to have an opacity of 100% over the sun. I'm not sure exactly, but it may have a more vectorized look if you had the opacity at full. I don't know though, and it certainly looks great the way it is.

Question - What does it mean that your site is CSS and XHTML tested mean? Why did you get some sort of extra approval?

Reply

I think this is simply great!
The theme, color, banner...and yes that little cute menu is simply great!
I really loved the way you did this template....well are you using dreamweaver and fireworks????
anyways really great template!

Reply

Hey nice template
i just wanted to tell you that when you use vector images it is generally better to keep with it rather than using JPGs. Gifs would be just fine as well.
And have you looked at clouds recently? They don't sort of fuse with the sun; it covers it- well thats wat i think anyway...

But still like i said your site looks really nice

Reply

This is what I like about your template:
Good Colors
Good Layout
XHTML
Good Pictures
This is what I don't like:
Too much advertisement for your site one button is enough

Reply

Eh, just means that your coding is cross-browser compatible. The standard set for the cross-browser coding is deemed by the World Wide Web Consortium... you'll find them here. If you wish to work on learning the 'correct' ways to code, applicable to the w3c's code. drop by here, w3schools. Personally, I see it as something for people with extra time on their hands.

Biskie, feeling the layout, I liked the old one better though

Panda

Reply

Haha, I'm not changing mine. I wub mine. But anyways, here are replies in no order:

-I hand-altered it in notepad from my template and fixed up some errors with it and IE (gawsh, IE = BAD).

-I'm a newbie at vector anything so the technique of it hasn't gripped me yet. I'm gonna brush up on a style before I do that bit again but I kind of like the look. I went with the vector whatever because it was the only word I could come up with on short notice and my image felt pretty vectory. Or so I thought :/

I'm not too big of a fan on gifs - I mean, they conserve on file size, but I like the quality of the image to stand out which is why all my images are max size jpegs. I try to make the page load fast though - I know that can be annoying @_@

-The advertisement for my site appears pretty much twice which I think is probably fine. I like having it on the footer because when people scroll down, they don't see copyright messages that claim the work as their own. Plus, with an image editing program, you can easily take it off the footer. I think I may plan to include a blank footer just in case but have a watermark. However, the link to my site appears only once.

-I was doing the clouds kind of freehand with a vector brush so I may have messed up a little on the opacity. There's one little pixel that extends up towards the sun that I need to edit and put in the zip file.

-And the CSS/XHTML one has already been answer - thank you, Panda

Anyways, thank you all for your comments - I'm taking the above things into consideration and hopefully I'll spawn out a better one later.

 

 

 

Reply

GIFs can have good quality, too. Some sigs of mine are GIFs, and they look the same as if it were to be as a JPG image, just smaller filesize, O_o (still amazed at that). Usually just 80% compression for JPGs will work, without any difference in appearance, no need for 100%. But, yea, GIFs would have been better.

Reply